Constructivism

Constructivism, as both an epistemology and pedagogy, covers a range of theories about the nature of knowledge and its acquisition. Constructivist theories have in common a manifestly structuralist epistemology, typical of 20th-century modernity, that challenges the dualistic Cartesian and empiricist conceptualizations of knowledge—as well as the positivistic behaviorist theories and pedagogies—and the presumption that internal knowledge represents or mirrors the external world.

[Page 151]To varying degrees and in different ways, constructivist scholars hold that, rather than being passive receivers of an objectively available external truth, individual subjects actively construct knowledge through the development of increasingly sophisticated mental structures and by building knowledge on top of previously acquired knowledge. Challenging the primacy of rote, memorization, and lecture in classical pedagogy, many constructivists agree that students should develop knowledge through experimentation and facilitated experience, rather than acquiring it through prepackaged forms from teachers, books, or other texts. However, constructivists do not preclude traditional teaching techniques as much as give them new context and purpose. Constructivists further argue that the naïve classical pedagogies ignore the highly individual and stage-dependent structures upon which children formulate knowledge.

Constructivist theory emerged from the work of two 20th century psychologists: Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. While Piaget was interested in how individuals developed through their idiosyncratic interaction with the environment, Vygotsky analyzed development as the internalization of culturally mediated symbol systems. For Piaget, the child progressively builds knowledge structures—sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operations, and formal operational—through their biological development and their corresponding experience in the world. New concepts form out of challenging experiences that cause the child to question old assumptions or to form new theories through processes of assimilation and accommodation. In assimilating, the child simplifies or stereotypes complex external phenomena, giving them meaning in accordance with existing schema. In accommodating, the child modifies existing schema to adapt to new or conflicting information or stimuli.

Vygotsky came to similar conclusions about human development, but emphasized the communal development of representational systems. For example, he argued that in “civilized” societies, humans replace concrete operations of memory with abstract logical systems that allow them to make more advanced use of memory. Through communal experience, “primitive” cultures move from photographic and other concrete uses of memory to a self-conscious reflection on the operation of memory, at which point they begin to use memory tools—sign systems ranging from writing to systems of knots, notches in feathers, number systems, and maps—in order to employ (dominate) memory in more sophisticated ways.

From these origins, contemporary constructivism can usefully be understood as having two main branches—social constructivism, which traces its origins more specifically to Vygotsky, and a more traditional Piagetian psychological constructivism. Focusing on the social dimensions of knowledge, social constructivism studies the political and social dimensions of knowledge discourses and disciplines, the political and social dimensions of knowledge acquisition, and the position of learners within structures of power and knowledge. More traditional forms of constructivism are more focused on the student-subject in processes of knowledge formation.

While education scholars vigorously debate the conclusiveness of the empirical evidence for the efficacy of constructivist pedagogy, constructivism remains increasingly popular in the classroom. Educators have embraced teaching techniques influenced by constructivist theories, ranging from group work to exercises that develop students' meta-knowledge of their learning processes. Despite widespread enthusiasm for these learning strategies, some argue that teachers without a sophisticated understanding of constructivism transmogrify constructivist ideals into oversimplified “hands-off” approaches.

...