Contemporary constructivism is not a totally new idea. On the contrary, there is a long-standing tradition of constructivist ideas in philosophy, in the philosophy and practice of education, and also in empirical research on students” preinstructional conceptions in science. Steffe (1990b) briefly outlined some aspects of the history of constructivism. For instance, he pointed out that Kant (1724–1804) held major constructivist ideas. Jung (1985) interpreted Bacon’s (1561–1626) ideas in Novum Organum within such a framework.

Die konstruktivistische Sichtweise hat sich in der naturwissenschaftsdidaktischen Lehrund Lernforschung als fruchtbar und flexibel erwiesen. Zunächst eher radikal konstruktivistischen Positionen des Wissenserwerbs nahe, hat sie sich zu einem Paradigma entwickelt, das über Aspekte des Wissenserwerbs hinausgeht und wichtige Aspekte des sozialen Konstruktivismus einschließt. Dieses Paradigma sieht die individuelle und soziale Konstruktion des Wissens eingebettet in umfassende Ansätze des naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts, die sich an den Fähigkeiten, Interessen und Bedürfnissen der Schüler orientieren. Es hat auch der Entwicklung von neuen Modellen der Lehrerbildung wichtige Impulse gegeben. Unter dem Dach des Konstruktivismus ist ein breites Spektrum unterschiedlicher Ausrichtungen versammelt, dessen gemeinsamer Kern einem pragmatischen, moderaten Konstruktivismus entspricht. Englisch: The constructivist view has proven a most powerful paradigm for science education research on learning and instruction. Initially near to radical constructivist ideas it has developed towards a paradigm that goes far beyond a frame for knowledge acquisition and also includes issues of social constructivism. Construction of knowledge is viewed as embedded in somewhat holistic approaches of orienting science instruction towards student’s abilities, interests, and needs in general. The constructivist view has also provided science teacher education with powerful new ideas. There are many variants under the umbrella of the constructivist view which by no means forms a consistent theory. But the common core of this view may be indicated by the position of a pragmatic and moderate constructivism.

The constructivist view has proven a most powerful paradigm for science education research on learning and instruction. Initially near to radical constructivist ideas it has developed towards a paradigm that goes far beyond a frame for knowledge acquisition and also includes issues of social constructivism. Construction of knowledge is viewed as embedded in somewhat holistic approaches of orienting science instruction towards student’s abilities, interests, and needs in general. The constructivist view has also provided science teacher education with powerful new ideas. There are many variants under the umbrella of the constructivist view which by no means forms a consistent theory. But the common core of this view may be indicated by the position of a pragmatic and moderate constructivism.

There is certainly something fashionable about constructivism in science education nowadays. It is further true that constructivism is by no means a consistent movement, there are many variants of this view in use. Furthermore, it appears that constructivism, for some science educators, in any case, has become the new ideology of science education that provides a cure for every problem of teaching and learning science. But without any doubt constructivism has become also a most valuable guideline for science education – for science teaching and learning as well as for research in these fields. This paper attempts to review the myths, the misunderstandings, the polemics and the serious critiques concerning constructivism. It will be argued in favor of a consistent and “moderate” constructivist view in science education that in fact may provide substantial progress in our field and which major features will be among the valuable views of science education even after the term constructivism will have gone out of fashion.

Key words: constructivism, science education, conceptual change

Since the 1980s constructivist views have played an important role in science education research and in re- search on learning and instruction in general. It appears that constructivist approaches are better suited than “traditionally” oriented approaches to address key issues of recent conceptions of scientific literacy. There is also evidence that they allow more efficient teaching and learning processes. Recent quality development projects are usually based on constructivist ideas. However, it turned out that it is rather difficult to set constructivist ideas into practice. There is a large gap between what research on teaching and learning has to offer instructional design on the one hand and instructional practice in normal classes on the other. The study presented here is part of the “IPN – Physics Video Study” which is a project within the “BiQua” Priority Program of the German Science Foundation. The main aim is to investigate whether the teaching practice of a sample of German physics teachers meets key characteristics of constructivist learning environments as proposed in the literature. A category system called COSC (Constructivist Oriented Science Classes) was de- veloped to identify the extent constructivist characteristics may be observed in the lessons of the 13 teachers of the sample. It turned out that key characteristics of constructivist oriented learning environments are not frequently observed. Preliminary analyses revealed that if certain features occur more frequently (like providing thought provoking problems and addressing students’ ideas) the development of achievement is better. Interviews clearly showed that most teachers do not hold constructivist views of teaching and lear- ning and that they are not informed about key results of research on teaching and learning.