Nowadays, a number of different learning techniques are being applied in architectural design studios for first year students. The “Constructivist teaching method”, one of these techniques which integrates different methods in education and can be called the common intersection point of different methods, is currently considered useful in architectural education. The “Contructivist teaching method” includes a procedure where the student actively participates in every stage of the learning process instead of being a passive listener. Constructivist teaching techniques as well as a wide variety of methods claim to be based on constructivist learning theory. Most of these techniques include some form of guided discovery where the teacher avoids encouraging the student to assume a passive listener position and rather supports learning sessions of question, answer, discussions and an interactive environment. For this purpose, experimental samples of design studio exercises are examined in this paper. Outcomes are determined beneficial to improve students’ creativity in the design process.

Key words: architectural design education, constructivist teaching methods.

In an epistemology where mathematics teaching is viewed as goal-directed interactive communication in a consensual domain of experience, mathematics learning is viewed as reflective abstraction in the context of scheme theory. In this view, mathematical knowledge is understood as coordinated schemes of action and operation. Consequently, research methodology has to be designed as a flexible, investigative tool. The constructivist teaching experiment is a technique that was designed to investigate children’s mathematical knowledge and how it might be learned in the context of mathematics teaching (Cobb & Steffe, 1983; Hunting, 1983; Steffe, 1984). In a teaching experiment, the role of the researcher changes from an observer who intends to establish objective scientific facts to an actor who intends to construct models that are relative to his or her own actions.

In an epistemology where mathematics teaching is viewed as goal-directed interactive communication in a consensual domain of experience, mathematics learning is viewed as reflective abstraction in the context of scheme theory. In this view, mathematical knowledge is understood as coordinated schemes of action and operation. Consequently, research methodology has to be designed as a flexible, investigative tool. The constructivist teaching experiment is a technique that was designed to investigate children’s mathematical knowledge it might be learned in the context of mathematics teaching (Cobb & Steffe, 1983; Hunting, 1983; Steffe, 1984). In a teaching experiment, the role of the researcher changes from an observer who intends to establish objective scientific facts to an actor who intends to construct models that are relative to his or her own actions.

Key words: Constructivism, Methodology, Teaching experiment, Instrumental understanding

Excerpt: The constructivist teaching experiment emerged in the United States circa 1975 (Steffe et al. 1976) in an attempt to understand children’s numerical thinking and how that thinking might change rather than to rely on models that were developed outside of mathematics education for purposes other than educating children (e.g., Piaget and Szeminska 1952; McLellan and Dewey 1895; Brownell 1928). The use of the constructivist teaching experiment in the United State was buttressed by versions of the teaching experiment methodology that were being used already by researchers in the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences in the then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Wirszup and Kilpatrick 1975–1978). The work at the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences provided academic respectability for what was then a major departure in the practice of research in mathematics education in the United States, not only in terms of research methods but more crucially in terms of the research orientation of the methodology.

Key words: constructivism, methodology, teaching experiment, instrumental understanding.

Excerpt: There are many aspects of constructivism that are unobjectionable. For example, we surely must construct mental representations of the external world that we can use to function in that world. In that sense, all learning is essentially constructivist and I am not aware of any theorist who objects to this characterization of learning. Constructivist teaching intended to teach people how to construct knowledge by withholding information from learners is another matter entirely. Withholding easily presented information from learners is a major characteristic of constructivist teaching, inquiry and problem-based learning. Requiring students to discover knowledge rather than explicitly providing them with essential information has become a dominant teaching paradigm. It is a paradigm based on the assumption that knowledge acquired during a problemsolving search is more useful than the same knowledge presented explicitly by an instructor. The purpose of this chapter is to indicate that there is nothing in our cognitive architecture suggesting that it might be beneficial to withhold readily presentable information from students so that they can discover it themselves.

After a long period of paradigmatic stabilityin the field of general didactics (Allgemeine Didaktik) in Germany, the proponents of the ‘constructivist didactics’ claim to be formulating a new approach on the theoretical as well as practical levels. This claim is analysed and evaluated. Four background theories of constructivist didactics are sketched; the central arguments of these didactics are reconstructed; some examples of practical constructivist teaching recommendations presented; and, finally, constructivist didactics is critically analysed in the context of a theory of learning in schools. The conclusion is that constructivist didactics is not a new paradigm in the sense that its proponents claim it to be.

Constructivist thought and practice connect easily with forms of art education that emphasize choice and student agency. This article traces the contemporary forms of constructivism that vie with more structured pedagogical approaches in American schools and recommends policies and procedures that may preserve the qualities of constructivist teaching in the arts in an era of restricted possibilities for educational innovation.

Key words: art education, choice, constructivism

This case study investigates the variety of constructivist approaches to teaching evident in classroom practice. Teaching practices associated with constructivist perspectives have been prevalent in curriculum reforms for some time. Meanwhile, constructivist approaches have been critically discussed in scholarly literature, revealing problematic and ambiguous aspects. This study introduces a model describing constructivist teaching practices according to the following dimensions: knowledge structuring activities, exercise of student autonomy, organisation of authentic learning environments and problem-oriented learning activities. This model is used to analyse the classroom practice of five primary teachers using video recordings. The results of this analysis suggest that the teaching approaches differed primarily in the degree of student autonomy allowed, so that either more comprehensive constructivist teaching methods or rather minor constructivist teaching techniques were emphasised. The distinction between constructivist teaching methods and constructivist teaching techniques is suggested as an explanation of the observed variation among constructivist approaches to teaching. This study identifies the characteristics of these teaching practices, helping researchers and teachers to articulate more nuanced teaching approaches in the future.

Key words: constructivism, teaching approaches, exercise of student autonomy, video-observation.

Open peer commentary on the article “Examining the Role of Re-Presentation in Mathematical Problem Solving: An Application of Ernst von Glasersfeld’s Conceptual Analysis” by Victor V. Cifarelli & Volkan Sevim. Upshot: In this commentary, I address the viability of conducting constructivist teaching experiments to develop models of students’ conceptualizations. I also discuss how this research tradition has been adapted by researchers to conduct classroom teaching experiments. In my concluding remarks, I address the need for researchers to develop models for teacher learning.

Classroom teachers are finding the implementation of constructivist instruction far more difficult than the reform community acknowledges. This article presents a theoretical analysis of constructivism in practice by building a framework of dilemmas that explicates the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political planes of the constructivist teaching experience. In this context, “constructivism in practice” is a concept situated in the ambiguities, tensions, and compromises that arise among stakeholders in the educational enterprise as constructivism is used as a basis for teaching. In addition to providing a unique theoretical perspective for researchers, the framework is a heuristic for teachers, providing critical questions that allow them to interrogate their own beliefs, question institutional routines, and understand more deeply the forces that influence their classroom practice.

Key words: Constructivism, reform, teacher knowledge, teaching.