with their signs that can be synthesized with the model of process concepts developed under the auspices of principle (i.e. the discussion of the concept of scheme ). Practical procedures, like the use of thesauri, are also tested in an experiment which again relates back to the description of scheme . Reversing this course of action, descriptions are also inductively built up for the umbrella categories of knowledge engineering and language engineering , whereby terminographic praxeology is again turned on its own theoretical basis. Here, the first indication of the prob- lem of topicality and agenda (in subject delimitation) and the problem of the “implicit term” that needs to be inserted into the context in interpretation (rather than the other way around) appears. With regard to the former, the idea of the simulation of the human intellect within the classical paradigm of artificial intelligence (the principle underlying the procedures of knowl- edge engineering) is inverted to express the simulating capacities of the human mind. The term simulation is then inserted into the context of radicalconstructivism. This is found to also fill a gap in the function of the construct of disciplinarity , i.e. the simulation of contexts . Here, the heuristics of goal-directedness and stable regularities are outlined. Artifacts like semantic networks are understood as instruments of the sociological imagination which serve humans to induce “conventional meanings” rather than as precursors of “intelligent” machines. This insight is also extrapolated in an interactive analysis of language engineering , whereby the definition of the field label is found to entail its composition in terms of sub-fields or its membership in a larger classification. However, language engineering in operational terms is understood as codification technique that can be seen as a part of all the procedures under consideration. As such, it brings together the different means used in philosophical terminography when seen as discourse produc- tion. This task is in this case that of producing written discourse which is not itself exempt from the quality of artificiality. This is seen to align with the synthetic view of worldview construction or maker’s knowledge that is later set in relation to the agenda of instrumental reason. This is one of the agendas that are assumed to express themselves in the stereotypical codification mentalities . Another blank in the function of the discourse-world model is filled by the anthropo- logical perspective on the – loosely organized – semantic fields whose formulation can foreground an agenda . The text-world model gains its operational counterpart in the semantic network . This complements the idea of regenerative theory construction by assigning means to ends. The text dictionary is finally suggested as a possible medium for the discourse production of philosophical terminography .
It’s interesting to note that synergy principles allow us to learn a man as a complex self-organizing object whose epistemological activity occurs in correspondence with logics of synergetic models. It’s possible to conclude after studying the cognition process in the theory of radicalconstructivism that the achievement of some balance between the reality and the result of subject’s cognition activity is impossible in practice. As subject constructs the world, everyone will have his own reality. It means that subject doesn’t feel any ‘resistance’ from the reality. He doesn’t see any boundary between his own experience and the reality itself. Application of this idea to the theory of self-organization can lead us to the thought of cognition self-organization by subject (its examples are ideas by P. Watzlawick, J. Piaget). If some knowledge received by subject corresponds to the reality, it means the construct coincidence with the world perceived that can be both subjective and physical (Glasersfeld 1996). Hence, cognition is adaptation (object has got something similar to subject’s activity).
The meaning of constructivism varies according to one's perspective and position. Within educational contexts there are philosophical meanings of constructivism, as well as personal constructivism as described by Piaget (1967), social constructivism outlined by Vygtosky (1978), radicalconstructivism advocated by von Glasersfield (1995), constructivist epistemologies, and educational constructivism (Mathews, 1998). Social constructivism and educational constructivism (including theories of learning and pedagogy) have had the greatest impact on instruction and curriculum design because they seem to be the most conducive to integration into current educational approaches. Defining Constructivism
social, cultural, socio-cultural and critical, are encountered in literature. The most common of these are cognitive, radical and social constructivism . Cognitive constructivism is based on the work of Swiss developmental psychologist Jean Piaget. Piaget's theory has two major parts: an "ages and stages" component that predicts what children can and cannot understand at different ages, and a theory of development that describes how children develop cognitive abilities. Social constructivism is related to Vygotsky`s ideas and is based on the idea that all knowledge is constructed socially, and is in the social-centered group of constructivism. As a matter of fact, while Piaget (1955) tries to examine the process of acquiring knowledge , Glasersfeld (1995) examines the relation between knowledge and reality (radicalconstructivism), and puts more emphasis on individual elements in the process of constructing the knowledge. On the other hand, both Piaget (1955) and Glasersfeld (1995) explain the learning process by means of individual experiences in daily life , and what is understood from those experiences. Thus two kinds are in the individual centered group of constructivism.
To create personal relevance, learners need to understand the benefits and importance of the curriculum for their own interests. Teachers can promote this relevance by incorporating real-life situations and experiences into their students' classroom learning. To give students an opportunity to be involved in creating knowledge, the learner should be involved not in activities in which the goal is to memorize facts but in problem-solving activities. For instructional design geared toward radicalconstructivism, students should be provided with personal autonomy in which individual work is part of the instructional framework. Also, students should be part of the process of designing the problem as well as dictating the process for working on that problem. Furthermore, to actively engage students, “the teacher's role should be to challenge the learner's thinking—not to dictate or attempt to proceduralize that thinking” (Savery & Duffy, 2001, p. 5). For instruction geared toward social constructivism, collaboration provides opportunities for students to interact and teach one another in small group work.
Critical constructivism looks at constructivism within a social and cultural environment, but adds a critical dimension aimed at reforming these environments in order to improve the success of constructivism applied as a referent (Dougiamas, 1998). Taylor (1996) describes critical constructivism as a social epistemology that addresses the socio-cultural context of knowledge construction and serves as a referent for cultural reform. It confirms the relativism of radicalconstructivism, and also identifies the learner as being suspended in semiotic systems similar to those earlier identified in social and cultural constructivism. To these, critical constructivism adds a greater emphasis on the actions for change of a learning teacher (Dougiamas, 1998). Not only truth and reality, but also evidence, document, experience, fact, proof and other central categories of empirical research reveal their contingent character as a social and ideological construction. Thus, a realist or relativist interpretation is subject to criticism.
natural and social sciences, it is paradoxical that the scholars who research science have embarked on a totally different approach to their object of study. They have subscribed to humanistic paradigms and methodological approaches that can be envisaged altogether under the aegis of social constructivism. This is a problem that deserves attention and better understanding. It is also interesting to consider how scientists who very often work within a positivist paradigmatic environment react to this unusual turn, in particular when we experience today a very strong momentum towards the ideas of the social construction of reality. In this case, we have an overlap of two major areas of concern. One is associated with the nature of the epistemological foundations of contemporary knowledge production systems; the other is related to the ways of studying how social influences shape not only knowledge, but the knowledge production systems as well.
The principles of Constructivism emphasizes (Bencze, 2005) the building or constructing that occurs in the learners’ minds when they learn. In everyday life what each person sees or observes depends more on what is already stored in the person’s brain than on what is being emitted from the image. This therefore suggests that learning is an active rather than passive process. In other words learners construct a unique mental image by combining information, in their heads with the information they receive in classrooms or from their sense organs. As far as instruction is concerned the instructor and the learners should engage in active dialogue, such that the presented information to the learner should match the learners’ current state of understanding so that the learners continually build upon what they have already learnt. The instructor should acknowledge that learners do not learn in the same way, and so they should implement a variety of teaching styles throughout a course for this would give different learners a chance to learn.
Critical Realism is a philosophical system originating from the work of the Indo-British philosopher Roy Bhaskar in collaboration with other social theorists including Margaret Archer, Mervyn Hartwig, Tony Lawson, Alan Norrie and Andrew Sayer. It has a ‘journal, a book series, an association, an annual meeting and all the trappings of an intellectual movement’ . Bhaskar sought to develop a realist philosophy of science and social science. It argues for the development of an ontology between empirical realism (Positivism) and transcendental idealism (Constructivism/Subjectivism). It accepts objectivism and presents a stratified view of reality that looks at emergent entities and the underlying structures that cause events to happen . The existence of phenomena with multiple interpretations of them results in a hierarchy of meanings emerges to justify ‘from an objective standpoint and how it is understood, perceived and theorized by subjective observers. Reference  posited that traditional approaches by researchers to provide an explanation of the phenomena that they were researching were unsatisfactory in seeking to explore and identify the underlying causes for phenomena. Through the Critical Realist approach phenomena are looked at through an explorative process to identify the structures and mechanisms that lie beneath the surface and cause the events that constitute the phenomena. The primary function of Critical Realism thus lies in determining what is objectively real and what is subjectively accepted as truth’ .
The very common feature of constructivism learning and formative assessment in science education is their emphasis on learning process rather than the final product. Students will have many opportunities to engage in the learning process by integrating their intellectual, emotional, and spiritual intelligences with everyday life situations. Both constructivism learning and formative assessment involve interaction of learning adaptation processes and learning experiences that continuously supplement information to formulate or synthesize new knowledge. Constructivism learning enables students to acquire knowledge by actively engaging in building that knowledge based on experiences, existing knowledge and reflection. The knowledge is regarded as dynamic phenomenon because the interpretation of something can change based on the self-interpretation given to the environmental phenomenon. Similarly, formative assessment reinforces student learning and provides continuous improvement in student’s achievement in the classroom. The similarities between constructivism learning and formative assessments in science subjects can be categorised into eight categories; the incorporation of learning with the pupils’ culture; emphasis on inquiry and reflection approaches; exploration; authentic learning based on experience; strengthening critical thinking; awareness of the importance of learning science; informal learning, and; teachers recognize students’ potential.
Abstract : Constructivism is a major intellectual influence on the development of modern learning technology. This paper first reviews the main doctrine of the constructivist approach. The application of constructivism to teaching and learning computing subjects is then critically discussed. It is argued that constructivism provides a set of ideas that should have a deeper and more widespread impact on computing teaching and learning. There are many variants within constructivism - therefore the application of constructivism to computing requires careful evaluation of the validity and applicability of the pedagogical ideas and principles proposed.
Constructivism is not a new concept in education. Early thoughts about a learner centered methodology in teaching can be traced back to the writings of Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates. Plato had theorized that learners contain a belief system that has the ability to be challenged by their own investigation and research as to what is true about their previous knowledge and what is false. In a similar way, Socrates believed in the role of the teacher as questioner. The idea of the instructor as questioner can be found today as instructors pose essential questions to students in preparation for further investigation rather than to recite definitive answers (Adams and Burns 1999). Even the works of Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) indicate his alignment with the belief that knowledge is based on a person‟s own viewpoint. Kant supported the notion that humans have the ability to gather information through perception, organize it within their cognitive structures, reflect on and analyze what happens to them, and then apply meaning to those situations.
qualitative psychology research. Within the context of these activities, I have been struck by how a commitment to constructivism is often taken to imply a simultaneous commitment to relativism. This happens as a result of collapsing ontological and epistemological concerns into one (ie. what Bhaskar (eg. 1978) called the ‘epistemic fallacy’), thus constructing a realism-relativism dualism which leaves us with only two, apparently contrasting views of the nature of ‘reality’: one that proposes that there is a singular external reality which can be accurately and objectively captured by the researcher (‘realism’), and another which proposes that what is experienced as ‘real’ depends upon the mindset of the person who is experiencing it and that there is no ‘reality’ beyond such subjective realities (‘relativism’). In their recent text ‘The Constructivist Credo’ Guba and Lincoln (2013) represent this
A fifth core tenet of constructivism emerges almost naturally out of the others. From a constructivist perspective there can be no guarantees, and hence should be no expectation, of institutional equilibrium (not even of dynamic equilibrium). If institutions are understood as contingent upon the social constructions out of which they arise and in and through which they continue to exist and they are also understood as disciplining of practice in an almost Foucauldian way, then they are certainly likely to give rise to path dependent evolutionary tendencies. But there is absolutely no reason to assume that such path dependencies should prove cumulatively stabilising over time rather than cumulatively destabilising. That is something, it seems, the global financial crisis has taught us; but it should not be news to constructivists.
tudent Centred Learning (SCL) or Student Centred Team-Based Learning (SCTL) has been considered a big shift from the traditional teacher centred learning; the latter occurs where the teacher is the centre of attention in disseminating information directly to the students. Student centred learning, however, is a learning approach where students are the focus of the learning process; preparing the lesson prior to the intended lecture, participating actively in class and working to achieve a common academic goal. Students in this mode of learning are seen to be more extrinsically motivated and learn important skills such as critical thinking and problem solving (Zakaria & Iksan, 2007; Johnson, Kimball, Melendez, Myers, Rhea, & Travis, 2009; Froyd & Simpson, 2010). Based on the premise that all humans construct their own perspective of the world is the Constructivism theory. A person adjusts his mental model to incorporate new experiences and make sense of this new information, and his schema is constantly readjusting. Learners are not passive recipients of information but are active agents engaging in constructing their own knowledge. In the classroom, a student is encouraged to think beyond what is presented, and explore further the concepts and working collaboratively with the teacher. Constructivism focuses on preparing the learner to problem solving situations, negotiate and generate solutions through sharing and exchange of ideas. Constructivism presents the idea that the learner is much more actively involved in a joint collaboration with the teacher of creating new meanings (Atherthon, 2010)
It is however submitted that the notion of science fiction is not far from reality in many cases. The development of technology is occurring at such a pace that Singularity might be achieved in the near future. The Singularity Summit has estimated that the year in which Singularity will be achieved as 2040. Another important point is that technological development is occurring at such a fast pace that many resembling features of Singularity society will be definitely attained even if Singularity is not realizable. The Automation will cause large scale replacement of workers within the next 10 years. The challenges to human employment will be multiplied in the case of large scale mechanization and automation. The potential of annihilation of large societies in terms of climate change and warfare will increase, regardless of whether singularity is achieved or not. There is need to develop a vision regarding the challenges of such society. The aim of this paper is to see the potential of constructivism in setting up and altering the basic terms of reference in such society.
Students decide what they need to learn by setting personal learning goals. Students construct for themselves meaningful knowledge as a result of their own activities and interaction with others. Learning strategies include library research, problem and case- based learning, solving assignments and projects, group work, discussions, and fieldwork. On the contrary, classroom teaching is a stimulus to the student’s real learning that mostly takes place outside formal classes. Further unstructured (Constructivism) classes with individualized activities, much discussion and optional attendance will provide more chances of learning then traditional class room methods. Students engage actively with the subject matter and transform new information into a form that makes personal sense to them and connects with prior knowledge. Students are placed immediately into a realistic context with specific coaching provided as needed.