Q1: Explain in your own words the principal contributions of Piaget's cognitive constructivist theory as a theory of learning. Make a list of questions you still have.
It is for sure that the core of Piaget’s theory is focusing on genetic epistemology, which is about the basic mechanisms of cognitive development. However, his theory as a theory of learning is also influential on education.
Firstly, the basic research and experiments on cognitive development in Piaget’s theory provides resources for people to understand the fundamental rules of children’s learning, memory, reasoning, and logic thinking.
Secondly, Piaget view that “intellectual acts” are “acts of organization of and adaption to the environment” (Wadworth, 1996, p. 13), and children are born with no storage of knowledge. These points indicate that the attainment of knowledge of children is a procedure during which children keep interaction with the environment in that they live. This does not only explain the differences between children’s intellectual development in some extent, but what is more important is to remind educators that building an active and effective interaction is essential in education. Besides, children are active learners in constructing knowledge structures; hence, their subjective initiative should be encouraged during the interaction with environments.
Thirdly, children’s learning was constrained by their current level of cognitive development, which means their position in the four sequential stages. When children are ready for learning some concepts by reaching certain stages, a well-organized and logic instruction manner is essential in teaching new concepts and the process of assimilation and accommodation of children.
At last, children are active learners. Their curiosity, interests, and maturation are the forces motive them to learn. The status of disequilibrium in children’s mind, and their will to discover and explore the world are also part of students learning motivation. By utilizing and channeling students’ motivation, the production of instruction and learning could be enhanced.
Q2: Make a connection between Piaget's stages of development and what James argued the teacher should know about cognitive development.
“Piaget believed that development progresses through a series of stages, each characterized by the development of new abilities or, more precisely, each consisting of a more advanced level of adaptation” (Lefrancois, 2005, p. 243). James (1962) states similar points with Piaget. Constructiveness is one part of native reaction according to James. It is said that from children at eight or nine years old begin to “handle objects, explore things” with hands, “doing and undoing”, which are ways to “construction and destruction” (p. 30). Although James and Piaget do not share exactly the same definition of construction, they both believe that constructing the knowledge structure or the process of constructiveness is helping children to adapt to the world in which they live. James also pointed that “objective-training” and construction could bring more “durable and profound” impression (p. 30). James also foreshadowed that the process of education is “nothing but the process of acquiring ideas or conceptions”. James suggested that children in different age are ready for different types of conceptions. Although James did not categorizing specific stages precisely, his basic idea that providing children the proper materials for their ages when they are ready is basically the same with Piaget’s. And James further wrote that learning from books or verbally is not the only way or best way. Feeding children through experiences is not wasting time but a way to motive children if using correctly. James also emphasized that reproduction or recitation of abstract words do not mean successful education, the meaning under that words in children’s mind should be paid more attention.
Q3: What would authors Airasian and Walsh have to say about the learning environment in which Bart was placed? Is this an example of constructivism? What are your own thoughts about constructivism as a theory of learning so far?
I believe the special school Bart went in that video is a good example of constructivism. There is no common rule in this classroom except every student learns in his own pace. No exams, homework or required readings from teachers, literally. (The exception is animate books are throw into trash can.) I guess Airasian and Walsh would describe that this special school make constructivism relatively manageable. The teacher in that classroom does not use “one right answer” (Airasian & Walsh, 1997, p.448) to require all students and students’ answers are all praised. Bart’s answer of paradox and his little chemistry experiment are respected even the teacher knows there are problems in his ideas. Hence, Airasian and Walsh would also argue that the application of constructivism is difficult. Firstly, Bart is not intellectually ready for the type of learning without tradition teaching from teachers; secondly, Bart has not learned how to perform in a brand new constructivism classroom, in which searching for right answers is not appropriate and thinking in his own way is encouraged. Airasian and Walsh would suggest that time is needed for both teachers and students when they are requiring transforming from traditional classroom for a regular student.
Constructivism is an appealing and encouraging theory in the interpretation of how children learn and how they develop cognitively. Some general laws are provided by constructivism and teachers’ comprehension of these law would be beneficial for them to understand and sympathy the feeling of children. However, its application seems still having a long way to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment