The Many Faces of Constructivist Discussion

Although constructivist discussions in the classroom are often treated as if they were all of the same kind, in this paper I argue that there are subtle but important distinctions that need to be made. An analysis of these distinctions shows that there is a continuum of different constructivist discussions. At one extreme are teacher‐directed discussions where students are led to construct the ‘correct’ understanding of a pre‐decided conclusion; at the other extreme are unstructured discussions where students are free to construct any understanding. While there are many positions on the continuum, the middle ground is occupied by discussions that find a balance between teacher‐control and student‐independence, and between having set‐answers and a free‐for‐all. I argue that the Community of Inquiry is a useful conception of constructivist discussions in this middle ground.

[1]  Michael Pardales,et al.  Community of Inquiry: Its past and present future , 2006 .

[2]  C. Golding.  Pragmatism, constructivism and Socratic objectivity: The pragmatist epistemic aim of Philosophy for Children , 2007 .

[3]  Peter G. Boghossian.  Behaviorism, Constructivism, and Socratic Pedagogy , 2006 .

[4]  A. Lam.  Aims of education. , 1978, The Australian nurses' journal. Royal Australian Nursing Federation.

[5]  J. Bruner,et al.  The role of tutoring in problem solving. , 1976, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[6]  Philip Scott,et al.  The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons , 2006 .

[7]  C. Fosnot.  Enquiring Teachers, Enquiring Learners: A Constructivist Approach for Teaching , 1989 .

[8]  Caryl Emerson,et al.  Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics , 1985 .

[9]  J. Dewey.  How we think : a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process , 1934 .

[10]  D. C. Phillips.  The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Many Faces of Constructivism , 1995 .

[11]  J. Piaget.  The Development of Thought: Equilibration of Cognitive Structures , 1977 .

[12]  M. Gregory.  CONSTRUCTIVISM, STANDARDS, AND THE CLASSROOM COMMUNITY OF INQUITY , 2002 .

[13]  Paulo Freire,et al.  Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 2019, Toward a Just World Order.

[14]  Jacqueline Grennon Brooks,et al.  The Courage To Be Constructivist. , 1999 .

[15]  D. McInerney,et al.  Educational Psychology: Constructing Learning , 2008 .

[16]  A. Sharp.  Peirce, Feminism, and Philosophy for Children , 1993 .

[17]  D. Perkins.  The Many Faces of Constructivism. , 1999 .

[18]  R. Paul,et al.  Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs To Survive in a Changing World , 1991 .

[19]  D. A. Roberts.  Epistemic Authority for Teacher Knowledge: The Potential Role of Teacher Communities—A Response to Robert Orton , 1996 .

[20]  Ann Margaret Sharp,et al.  Teaching for better thinking : the classroom community of inquiry , 1995 .

[21]  C. Slade,et al.  Modeling the Development Process of Dialogical Critical Thinking in Pupils Aged 10 to 12 Years , 2005 .

[22]  D. C. Phillips.  Theories of Teaching and Learning , 2007 .

[23]  William B. Borgers.  DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATION. , 1919 .

[24]  Mark Freakley,et al.  Ethics and the Community of Inquiry: Education for Deliberative Democracy , 2006 .

[25]  D. Kennedy.  The Role of a Facilitator in a Community of Philosophical Inquiry , 2004 .

[26]  M. Bakhtin.  Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics , 1973 .