When I began exploring these two learning theories, I was curious to see how they were different. Like Dr. Orey states, many people do not know and understand the differences in the two theories, but it is important for teachers to understand so we can implement them effectively in our classrooms (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010). In the classroom, the theory that is evident and important is the constructionist theory. When students are engaged in their learning, and they are creating artifacts to show what they have learned, they are participating in the constructionist theory, according to Dr. Orey (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010). In my classroom, I feel that this is very important to help students grasp the concept and be more successful in their learning.
The instructional strategy we read about this week is generating and testing hypotheses. Of course, the first thing that came to my mind was science; however this strategy can be implemented into any subject. Once I began reading about it one of the aspects of this strategy is problem solving. Being a math teacher I got really excited because this is a major component in helping my students become better mathematicians. If students discover a problem, create a hypotheses and then test their hypotheses they are accomplishing this strategy. Generating and testing hypotheses correlates with the constructionist learning theory because students are able to use project based learning and their own experiences to create knowledge. Especially with problem solving, students have to generate ways to solve their problems, and continue to test those strategies until they successfully accomplish the problem.
Now that I know more about this strategy and constructionist theory, I feel that I will be more aware of the projects that I assign in the classroom. I want my students to be challenged and engage in meaningful learning through the projects. Of course to help them be successful, I will provide them with my expectations and resources; however students will have to complete all the hands-on components of the projects.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). [Webcast]. Constructivist and constructionist learning theories. Baltimore: Author.
Samantha -
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to hear a math teacher get excited about these ideas. I too, as a social studies teacher, immediately thought "science" when I heard the explanations. However, it is great that we can all use these ideas in our classes. It is interesting to hear what you are trying with math students. I also agree with you that if students are identifying the problem anbd working through a solution a lot is being accomplished in terms of constructionism. Like you mention, we must lead with expectations and demonstration of the process, but in the end it is the students who do the actual "constructing." Good luck moving forward with this in the math classes, sounds like constructionism can work in many different subject areas.
It is wonderful that you are able to apply this strategy to math. I have been able to apply these ideas to my Reading and Communication Arts classes. At first, I didn't see how Math could incorporate this strategy but now I get it. It is amazing that these strategies really can be applied to so many different areas. Students really do gain knowledge as they work through lessons in an engaged manner. Good post!
ReplyDelete-Joanie Grimm
Joanie and Rob,
ReplyDeleteIt is awesome that these strategies can be applied to any subject area. It is important that we at least give these instructional strategies a try in our classroom to see how it would affect student learning. If we make sure our lessons are student centered, and they are engaged in their learning I am sure they will be successful. One teacher once told me, that we should not be working too hard, the students should be doing all of the "work". Now, I realize she was saying they should be guiding their learning with our assistance not us standing in front of the room lecturing.
Thanks for your responses!
-Sam R.