Constructing Constructivist Curricula

Philip Flip Kromer with Oswaldo, Lizzy, and Chase
Thomas Hills' Knowing and Learning Course
April 28, 2005

The Challenge

In this course we have learned much about how people think, learn, and change their minds; and we have learned how this knowledge informs a theory of learning known as Constructivism. Constructivism's central insight is that “learning that occurs when students own and are involved in inquiry, investigation, and discovery is defferent, more in-depth, more enduring, and much more powerful than what occurs in a traditional classroom” [Marlowe & Page, Creating and Sustaining the Constructivist Classroom 1998]. The focus shifts away from having teachers divulge material and impart knowledge, to instead having students learn material and construct knowledge.

This shift in focus suggests a wide array of changes to instructional practice. A beginning or a traditional teacher may expect to receive a traditional (non-constructivist) curriculum such as AISD's IPGs. Our challenge was to find resources and strategies to help a teacher prepare a fully constructivist curriculum. Such a curriculum had to also

• Meet state educational standards,

• Meet professional standards (such as NCTM Standards),

• Prepare students for the TAKS and the SAT,

• Cover the full range of material in the alloted time

As these goals are somewhat at variance, this is a difficult problem.

Constructivist Principles

In a constructivist classroom, “a teacher does not stand and deliver most or even much of the content material. Rather, students uncover, discover, and reflect on content and their conceptions of such through inquiry, investigation, research, and analysis in the context of a problem, critical question, issue or theme. Students gain and are encouraged to develop through these processes the abilitiy to think for themselves, and to think critically; that is, to discriminate between the relevant and the irrelevant, to look at issues from different perspectives, to interpret and analyze written and electronic data, and ... to 'detect crap.' Constructivism focuses on in-depth understanding, not regurgitating and repeating back.” [Marlowe & Page 1998]

We can uncover four general principles of constructivist teaching:

• Learning occurs in context – activities are situated in “complex, realistic, and relevant environments.”
  Teachers should adopt valuable strategies from apprentice instruction.
  Teachers should identify what areas students are experts in and capitalize on that expertise
  Forge connections with everyday tasks, other classes, and future topics.

• Emphasis on Discovery – Encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative.
  Use raw data and primary sources, along with manipulative, interactive, and physical materials.
  Encourage student inquiry by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions and encouraging students to ask questions of each other; seeking elaboration of students' initial responses; and allowing significant wait time after posing questions.

• Learning is social – students and teachers form a Classroom Community that “encourage ownership in learning.”
  Allow student responses to drive lessons, shift instructional strategies, and alter content. Encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative.
  Inquire about students' understandings of concepts before sharing their own understanding of those concepts.
  Encourage students to engage in dialogue, both with the teacher and with one another.

• Learning is reflective – instructors should “nurture self-awareness of the knowledge construction process”
  Engage students in experiences that might engender contradictions to their initial hypotheses and then encourage discussion.
  Provide time for students to construct relationships and create metaphors.

(Synthesized from [Driscoll, Psychology of Learning for Instruction (2000) (quoted in ERIC Digest)], [Driscoll, “How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have To Do with It)” (2002)], and [Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms (excerpt in ERIC Digest) (1999)])

Stop for a second and look at the IPGs. What do you think is or isn't constructivist about teaching to the IPGs? In my opinion, they have integrated some emphasis

Changes

These principles suggest changes in how students learn and teachers teach:

• Discovery-based lessons

• Situate and Provide context

• Community learning: Group work; More student explanation; Students teach to & learn from others.

• Change instructional technique
  (questioning style; emphasis in assessment shifts to process, not outcome)

• Shift approach to classroom management
  (emphasis on community; students become stakeholders in course development)

• Reevaluate assessment

Since our project is exploring curriculum – the day-to-year plan for the classroom – we will only discuss resources for tackling the first three points.

Lesson and Activity Resources

Curricula

Micro vs. Macro

One way to adopt a constructivist curriculum is to apply constructivist principles at a day-to-day level. You could examine all the topics that need to be covered, choose well-situated activities that allow a student to explore each topic, and conduct those activities within a classroom community of learners. This would certainly be a major step forward, but you'll miss a major opportunity.

In the real world (whether it's the real world of carpenters and checkbook-balancers, or the real world of algebraic topologists and bioinformaticists), problems don't arise in neat bundles that are categorized and restricted by topic, they involve multi-step reasoning across subject and level boundaries. Reasoning about the diffusion speed of DNA strands in gel electrophoresis requires application of arithmetic and algebra, and understanding of rate-and-time problems, the atomic hypothesis, the chemical and biological makeup of DNA, and electric charge and force. A truly constructivist curriculum should include rethinking the course organization at a macro level.

For example, a traditional physics curriculum would begin something like this:

• Distance, Rate and Time

• Forces, Inertia and Acceleration

• Energy

• Rotational Motion

• Friction

• Simple Machines

The micro-constructivist approach would confront each topic in turn, using constructivist techniques. For example, students could explore the relationship among distance and speed using stopwatches or CBL graphing calculators. Each topic would be contained within a self-contained, discovery-based lesson or two.

In a macro-constructivist classroom, over several weeks each student for example could design, build, and test a model racecar (or elevator or robot or...). Students would meet each topic as it naturally arose: for instance, while exploring unpowered ('pinewood-derby') cars rolling down a ramp, the topics of gravity, speed and acceleration. They might meet problems that entangle several topics: choosing tires and wheels for a powered robot or racecar can lead to discussions of force and torque, friction, top speed, gear ratio, and mechanical strength. This is good. Once students see a topic crop up repeatedly in the context of different problems they want to solve, they will want to see the general approach and will be prepared to make the requisite connections.

Conclusions

It was fairly easy to discover resources that would allow a day-to-day adoption of constructivist principles. For each topic in the IPGs or a similar traditional approach, the links above give imaginative activities that will allow students to investigate and build their own understanding. However, it was very difficult to find coherent, constructivist curricula spanning a whole course – an integrated set of lessons and materials that clearly indicate where and how they meet standards and testing requirements.