Constructivism Professional Development Workshop

Assignment 3 Option B

Andrew Ho Yin Yeung

University of British Columbia

Educational Technology

ETEC 530 65A

April 9th, 2018

 1

Part A: Knowledge in Science

Information becomes knowledge through (sub)conscious application, informing thinking

with necessary analysis for problem solving. Pritchard (2014) defines knowledge as justified true

belief via effort with repeatable success. Knowledge is both formal (propositional) and practical

(ability), the accumulation of skills, beliefs and experiences. Reliable beliefs have instrumental

value, stabilizing responsible conceptions though remaining fallible. For instance, knowledge

gained through sense perception is easily deceived by indirect appearances. Constructivism based

on Piaget and Vygotsky (Fosnot, 2013) depicts knowledge through active equilibration and

nonlinear reorganization associated with stage development. Learners construct versions of the

world from theory and experience, where objects depend on mental schemas. There is no reality

beyond what the mind interprets, as seeming ceases to exist independent of construction. Mind

access however is privileged, so learners alone rule out what is relevant from incompatible

possibilities (Pritchard, 2014). Whenever contradictions perturb understanding, assimilation into

prior conceptions and accommodation towards modified frameworks restore coherency through

successive constructions. Constructivism asserts that knowledge cannot be passively transferred

as knowers pursue meaning recombining available concepts (Fosnot, 2013). Knowledge cannot

be directly taught but merely introduced, providing opportunities to bridge construction.

Adapting beliefs construed from evidence occurs gradually like rebuilding ships at sea (Swoyer,

2014), upholding present rationality towards further claims, at best situated within social context.

Revisions are judged for consistency using foundational axioms, which neither fixed nor

immutable employ charity principle to make as many beliefs true as possible.

 2

Having different knowledge types (eg. multiple intelligences) and ways of knowing,

construction is relative to what is already known in context (Fenstermacher, 1994). Social

conventions influence thought, constraining particular interpretation modes evolving over time.

Scientific knowledge can be explained through natural law, having falsifiable tentative

conclusions provisional on empirical support and conviction (Pritchard, 2014). Knowing

progresses incrementally making predictive hypotheses, with occasional paradigm shifts

replacing incommensurable theories, where sensitive facts change safely as nearly always true.

Truth becomes relative making learning subjective correct to framework (Swoyer, 2014). Instead

of validating nature, scientific knowledge aims toward most viable use for certain purpose.

Knowledge is more than representation, with adaptive function to abstract relationships beyond

reciting theory (Fosnot, 2013). Unverifiable information based on testimony is valued for

credibility despite possibly being false. Even responsible knowing provides no guarantees, where

certainty depends on abductive reasoning, making inferences from observed regularity. Tethered

knowledge is more valuable than opinion (Nola, 1997), tested by drawing out consequences.

Cognitive dissonances promote restructuring ideas where unexpected observations stimulate

active inquiry, directing curiosity to reframe existing knowledge and generate alternative

interpretations (So, 2002). Reflection creates opportunity to scaffold negotiated meaning, fitting

variable constructs together evolving with usage and interpretation (Fosnot, 2013). Permeating

change require lasting commitment amidst parental, administrator and advisor demands.

Literature Review

Many students are not independent learners initially, choosing sequenced instruction

through directed assistance (Anderson, 2004). Being predisposed to think in certain ways,

learners prefer to gain knowledge via transmission. Based on Sunal’s (2007) Renner Model
 3

description, learning involves cycling through experience, interpretation and exploration.

Intended outcomes are frequently already known reducing exploration to guided tour,

discouraging unproductive detours thereby omitting generation. Students however might not

draw expected connections from teacher analogies, given unique ways of responding to the

world (Pittman, 1999). Constructivism does require investing attention towards open inquiry,

discussing viability of ideas over correctness, through for example problem-based learning and

project-based Science. Reasoning with analogies helps construct personal interpretations being

more familiar with lives, restructuring similarities to visualize abstract concepts.

Learning is not the goal in many classrooms but rather time-on-task (So, 2002). Content

irrelevance contributes towards failed connections making all learning difficult. Introducing

theory first appears disconnected from experience, losing interest and questioning necessity.

Although teaching principles seems most direct and efficient, lacking immediately applicable

context detracts from engagement to steadily work outward based on readiness (Hung, 2013).

Introducing application first easily overwhelms given complexity, reducing motivation to further

pursuit. Motivation both intrinsic and reward is precondition for involvement, with extrinsic

more common in North America (Topping, 2005). Six motivators include challenge, curiosity,

control, recognition, competition and cooperation (Ciampa, 2013). Learner-differentiated inquiry

achieves optimal immersion level, avoiding boredom or frustration extremes with overly easy

and difficult tasks. Effective teaching repertoires establish a balanced approach, complementing

experiences as many roads lead to learning, interacting students with problem-oriented real

world issues (Chickering and Ehrmann, 1996). Personal relevancy enhances positive attitudes to

inspire lifelong learning through construction.

 4

Constructivism does not restrict learning to be unaided but rather unassisted (Alfieri et

al., 2011). Even discovery investigations require adequate structure and practice, timely feedback

and worked explanations. Otherwise limited guidance results in confusion, lack of focus and

productivity. Teaching should be more cooperative than imitative, determining what students

have learned over whether it has occurred. Educators facilitate supporting questions to probe

learners through process, not just as processor (Fosnot, 2013). Constructivism prioritizes student

needs before predetermined curricula and instructional strategies. Failure to answer might not

mean lack in knowledge for example, and can be used as opportunity to build resilience. Errors

should not be minimized or avoided since disequilibrium facilitates knowing, though correction

is critical when learning can be false. Existing knowledge is used to generate alternative

interpretations towards explaining contradictions and misconceptions.

Technologies enable constructivism envisioning new worlds leveraging (a)synchronous

communication and information retrieval. Asynchronous exchanges provide more time to

interpret and compose response, strengthening faculty interactions (Chickering and Ehrmann,

1996). Online learning features temporal freedom and geographic independence as true learner

spaces over institutional spaces (Anderson, 2004), providing greater access quality and quantity.

Accessibility from off-campus locations enable flexible schedules to blend methodologies,

designing learner-centred pedagogies while overcoming time and content limitations (Diaz et al.,

2009). Modularisation reduces timescale to customize learning at individual pace, feeling less

overwhelmed and more empowered for active participation and co-creation. Opposing prevalent

beliefs of technology as distraction (Denton, 2012), returning learner control helps integrate

personalized knowledge towards unfamiliar context. Even mere illusion of control provides

independent choice and versatile autonomy helping to reduce cognitive load (Ciampa, 2013).
 5

Technology reduces course management overheads and physical space demands (Coates et al.,

2005), utilizing pedagogically rich modalities to meet expectations with increasingly competitive

marketplace. Appealing convenient technologies emphasize collaboration over competition,

towards separating grades from self-efficacy (Gibbs and Simpson, 2005).

Technologies offer equalizing power for innovation and production within education and

entertainment, promoting equitable access moving idle lurking towards emergent sharing

(Butcher and Taylor, 2008). Not all digital technologies however are beneficial, and should not

be overemphasized at the cost of pedagogy. Media (text, audio, video) are not created equal

varying in availability (cost, time, expertise), making no technology perfect for every situation.

Text for example transmits information as decontextualized pieces, while visual presence enables

just-in-time learning (Coates et al., 2005), constructing best practice models to augment

knowledge. Adequate sustainable professional development is needed to avoid being

overwhelmed or underprepared. With diverse menus of educational technology (learning

management systems, social networking, mobile tools), selection considers needs to maximize

emerging affordances, guided by measurable anticipated outcomes like retention, completion,

progression (Diaz et al., 2009). While media allocation is determined by economic factors over

pedagogic, teachers often make the best use of whatever at hand (Bates, 2014). Educators

leverage available technology to accommodate variability and empower authentic reflection.

Self-organized groups for example produce multimedia rich content, expanding learning through

digital literacy towards internationalization.

Cloud technologies like Google Docs promote efficient collaboration, where synchronous

interactions enable construction through social dialogue, building teamwork and problem solving

(Denton, 2012). Since 2015, 80% of people have access to internet from mobile devices (Pegrum
 6

et al., 2013), becoming more flexible in when and how learning occurs, blurring public and

private lives. Education can be individually customized with personal learning networks,

repurposing technology to improve construction with intuitive tools. Social media for instance

affords connectivity for collaboration, modifying content gradually aggregating knowledge

through networked communications (Bates, 2014). Wikis are revolutionary web-based tools for

mutual participation, characterized by kaleidoscope and symphony. Wikipedia for example is the

largest encyclopedia written collaboratively over digital media (Butcher and Taylor, 2008).

Construction occurs through shared cooperation as users inhabit the same pages for simultaneous

editing on web browsers where nothing is ever lost. The four wikinomic principles: Open,

Peering, Sharing, and Global (Butcher and Taylor, 2008) enable transparent freedom and

expansive flexibility. Ever changing knowledge is layered through network group authoring,

though require some tending and gardening as content evolves towards infinite diversity. Pitfalls

including vandalism, deletion, misinformation, hostility, etc. can be minimized by promoting

accountability, becoming responsible for accuracy while maintaining proper netiquette.

#autoregulation

Constructivism involves autoregulation, pooling individual knowledge to recombine

available concepts, moving passive recipient to active knower (Nola, 1997). Both recursive and

interactive, learning as self-regulation is more than fact acquisition, recognizing shortcomings

and discouraging unquestioning acceptance. Like counterparts, even students with learning

disabilities can be self-regulating, viewing ordinary diversity as mutually enhancing (Fosnot,

2013). Impaired difference for human variation has socially-determined meaning, where

categorization results in hierarchy and discrimination. All learners can work towards needing

minimal guidance to reconstruct interpretive framework, demonstrating capability to not only

 7

participate but also contribute. Constructivism generalizes differential ability towards building

resiliency, removing stigma associated with seeking help. Scaffolding experiences along with

misconceptions toward consistent understandings involve continuous iterative processes

(Topping, 2005).

#reflectivetoss

Constructivist pedagogies include reflective toss (Hmelo-Silver and Barrows, 2006)

where intentional counterexamples are used to springboard explanations, revealing thinking and

testing ideas. Teachers mediate challenges, synchronizing collaborative workspaces to provide

autonomy in co-constructing knowledge. Mindful reflection is encouraged to interconnect close

transfer of pragmatic application with far transfer towards unfamiliar context (Hung, 2013).

Problem-based learning for instance evaluates alternative solutions, reasoning arguments to

negotiate shared meaning. Authentic problems are messy and complex, needing to reduce

unnecessary cross-context transitions amidst dynamically unfolding events. Reflective toss

empowers agency through student voice (Laux, 2018) to construct knowledge, linking content to

goals in response to activity.

 8

Part B – Constructivism in Science

Audience

This professional development workshop is designed for BC high school educators

teaching grades 8-12 Sciences (Chemistry, Physics, Biology, General). The presentation is

divided into three segments:

- Lecture: Knowledge in Science (Part A)

- Activity: Inquiry in Science (Activities)

- Collaborate: Constructivism in Science (Science Wiki)

Activities

1) Telestrations (Telephone Pictionary)

Separate participants into groups of 8-12: Give each person a vocabulary term (eg.

energy, atom, cell) that needs to be passed around the circle. People alternate between drawing

and writing until words have returned. Reveal how terms have evolved given unique word

associations and picture representations. What one person emphasizes is not immediately clear to

another, let alone variable artistic talent. Spinoffs include sitting participants back to back: Give

one person an image to verbally describe for partners to sketch. Switch roles giving an object to

feel while blindfolded for partners to reconstruct using playdoh. Reflect collectively on how

information was deconstructed, examining factors that improved communication. Rather than

interject content, facilitate discussion using self-generated questions, providing counterexamples

to interconnect content. #reflectivetoss

2) Lego Plane

Have a volunteer describe a pre-built Lego plane: Consider describing general shape,

color, size, etc., while others start building what is received. After set time limits, see how close
 9

participants get to the original. Additionally observe whether planes resemble each other,

identifying possible assumptions based on individual conceptions of planes. For example maybe

the pre-built has three wings, though participants missing that detail might default to two. Repeat

similar instructions having people work in small groups with specific pieces removed (all of one

color). Without the necessary building pieces, learners must combine available blocks to

approximate the original. Each block represents a fundamental concept that students must

acquire, though constructions are never identical. Discuss what that realization entails for

assessments. #autoregulation

3) Candle-In-Jar Inquiry

Have participants setup a candle in a trough of water: Cover the candle with a jar,

watching as the flame goes out and the water gets sucked in. Unsurprisingly the candle goes out

without oxygen, though explanations for the water rising typically generates multiple

conceptions: cooling decreases pressure, condensing produces vacuum, etc. Rather than judging

for one correct interpretation, see if consistent understandings can be reached by convincing

others of individual perspectives. What factors make explanations more likely to be accurate or

precise? #reflectivetoss

Science Wiki

Teachers as generators need to be more than consumers of university research, with most

knowing through action (Fenstermacher, 1994): Arrange participants into discipline-specific

groups to work on a communal wiki, brainstorming fundamental building pieces needed in each

Science. Begin layering these foundational understandings, discussing how blocks are combined

to form increasingly complex ideas. Are there multiple ways that knowledge can be constructed

to approach the same topic? What makes one structure better than another? Collectively separate
 10

expected learning outcomes for assimilation reinforcement from unexpected requiring

accommodation construction (Sunal, 2007). #autoregulation

Assessment

Assessment has more leverage on constructivism than pedagogy, employing feedback to

inform teaching (Bates, 2014). Learners are either cue seeking, conscious or deaf (Gibbs and

Simpson, 2005), navigating hidden curricula to filter what counts, strategically working out

selective negligence. Feedback should be forward-looking and context-specific, using explicit

criteria given in timely quality to convey high expectations. Participants will be surveyed on how

effective the workshop presented constructivism, soliciting examples of how actual Science

concepts are deconstructed, transmitted and reconstructed. Which of these aspects is most prone

to learner misconceptions? Is there agreement on what constitutes foundational blocks, and do

these fundamental pieces share commonalities between disciplines? Since giving feedback often

improves learning more than receiving (Ching and Hsu, 2016), conducting peer evaluation helps

identify strengths from weaknesses. Anonymous peer mediation offers effective mentoring

(scaffolding from more competent other) and role-modelling (simultaneous interaction).

Effectiveness can be measured observing how the wiki continues to evolve after participants

return to individual contexts.

 11

Evaluation Rubric

Assessment comments will be used to improve quality of future instruction.

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly

Disagree (2) Agree (4) Agree
(1) Nor (5)
Disagree
(3)
Content Development
Content is accurate, focused and
consistent
Content supports pedagogical goals
for ongoing learner achievement
Content improves work effectiveness
and personal development
Content is concrete, reasonable for
allotted time
Content is relevant and valuable to
my teaching
Organization Structure
Instructor was knowledgeable about
constructivism
Instructor was prepared to answer
participant questions
Materials were carefully aligned and
organized ahead of time
Opportunities were provided to
discuss new knowledge skills
I can apply what is learned to
classroom instruction

Provide specific written feedback balancing positive with constructive:

 12

References

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based

instruction enhance learning?. Journal of educational psychology, 103(1), 1.

Anderson, T. (2004). Towards a theory of online learning. Theory and practice of online

learning, 2, 109-119.

Bates. T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age. Retrieved from

http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/5-8-assessment-of-learning/

Butcher, H. K., & Taylor, J. Y. (2008). Using a wiki to enhance knowing participation in change

in the teaching-learning process. Visions: The Journal of Rogerian Nursing Science, 15(1),

30.

Chickering, A. W., & Ehrmann, S., C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as

lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6.

Ching, Y. H., & Hsu, Y. C. (2016). Learners’ Interpersonal Beliefs and Generated Feedback in

an Online Role-Playing Peer-Feedback Activity: An Exploratory Study. The International

Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2).

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of

Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96.

Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning

management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and

Management, 11(1), 19-36.

Denton, D. W. (2012). Enhancing instruction through constructivism, cooperative learning, and

cloud computing. TechTrends, 56(4), 34-41.

 13

Diaz, V., Garrett, P.B., Moore, J., & Schwartz, C. M. (2009). Faculty development for the 21st

century. Educause Review, 44(3), 46-55.

Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research

on teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20(1), 3-56.

Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, 2nd Ed. Teachers

College Press.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’

learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2006). Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning

facilitator. Interdisciplinary Journal of problem-based learning, 1(1), 4.

Hung, W. (2013). Problem‐based learning: A learning environment for enhancing learning

transfer. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2013(137), 27-38.

Laux, K. (2018). A theoretical understanding of the literature on student voice in the science

classroom. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(1), 111-129.

Nola, R. (1997). Constructivism in science and science education: A philosophical critique.

Science & Education, 6(1-2), 55-83.

Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption

of mobile handheld technologies in Western Australian independent schools. Australasian

Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1).

Pittman, K. M. (1999). Student‐generated analogies: Another way of knowing?. Journal of

research in science teaching, 36(1), 1-22.

Pritchard, D. (2014). What is this thing called knowledge? Third Edition; Routledge.
 14

Swoyer, Chris, "Relativism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition),

Edward N. Zalta (ed.).

Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645.