Comparing and Contrasting Constructivism and Essentialism
Introduction
The mission of effective schools is to instill and foster a love of learning in students. Throughout our coursework and class discussions, we have come to recognize that we are all fundamentally life-long learners who are continually seeking knowledge and understanding. The goal of education then, is to reach out to all academically diverse students and inspire in them a love of learning and a thirst for knowledge. Since all learners are unique, there is no one set philosophical framework or learning theory that will meet the needs of all students. Effective leaders guide staff in understanding the complex nature of the dimensions of learning. Itisnecessaryto be cognizant of a variety of learning philosophies and to utilize different teaching styles for different learners. Essentially, thisrequiresthe ability to apply different theories to different contexts.
Up to this point in class discussions and coursework, we have examined a variety of learning theories and principles. This paper shall address two viable options for an effective teacher’s bag of tricks: the Constructivismand EssentialismLearning Theories.
Constructivism
The Constructivism websites contain a plethora of information. There are many different perspectives on this theory. Reoccurring names embedded throughout the information on Constructivsm are Bruner, Vygotsky, Piaget, Jonassen, Wilson & Cole, Ernest, and Honebein. One way to describe the evolution of Constructivist concepts is “that of a prism with many different facets” (Murphy, 1997). A summary from the readings is as follows.
The Constructivist Learning Theory is a design for learning rather than the traditional view of planning for teaching. It is a paradigm shift from the behaviorist model of teaching (teacher talk, textbooks, passive learning, and regurgitation of facts/knowledge.) Constructivism focuses on a more cognitive approach to learning. (Collay & Gagnon, 2004). Multiple perspectives, authentic activities, and real-world environments are some of the themes associated with Constructivist learning and teaching. Students who engage in active learning are making their own meaning and constructing their own understanding based upon their knowledge base and experiences.
There are four assumptions at the heart of Constructivist learning (Collay & Gagnon, 2004): (1) knowledge is physically constructed by learners who are involved in active learning, (2) knowledge is symbolically constructed by learners who are making their own representations of action, (3) knowledge is socially constructed by learners who convey their meaning to others, and (4) knowledge is theoretically constructed by learners who try to explain things they don’t completely understand. There are six important elements of the Constructivist learning design: (1) exhibit, (2) situation, (3) groupings, (4) bridge, (5) questions and (6), reflections. The Constructivist approach can be adapted to any subject and/or curriculum by involving students as active participants in making meaning instead of passive recipients of information given to them by the teachers.“Constructivism places teachers and students together as learners in an environment devoted to learning” (Henson, 2001, p. 386). Expanding further on this notion, it is
a philosophy of learning founded on the premise that, by reflecting on our experiences, we construct our own understanding of the world we live in. The purpose of learning is for an individual to construct his or her own meaning, not just memorize the right answers and regurgitate someone else’s meaning. Each of us generates our own rules and mental models which we use to make sense of our experiences. Learning, therefore, is simply the process of adjusting our mental models to accommodate new experiences (Online Purpose Associates, 2004, p. 1).
In their discussion, Collay and Gagnon (2004) describe the student’s role in Constructivism. Students who engage in active learning are making their own meaning and constructing their own knowledge based upon their current and/or past knowledge” (pp. 1-2). Another author who espouses the philosophy of Constructivism is Elizabeth Murphy. Her writings describe both the student and teacher roles in Constructivist classrooms. She suggests that teachers are guides or facilitators of learning, while students are the sense makers; learning emphasizes the process and not the product.
Another significant element of Constructivism is technology. According to Murphy (1997) “technology is increasingly being touted as an optimal medium for the application of the Constructivist principles to learning” (pp. 2-4). Henson (2001) further clarifies the significant role of the teacher in Constructivist classrooms when he proclaims, “teacher responsibilities include creating information-rich environments where students think, explore, and construct meaning” (p. 30).
We live in an age of information which requires schools to consider what and how we teach children. It is the role of educators to prepare students to not only become wise consumers of the vast arena of information that is now available, but also to prepare them to become lifelong learners in our ever-changing 21st Century. This can be successfully accomplished by teaching them skills to become information literate. Such a focus is needed because “today, all persons are users of information – as citizens, business people, and problem-solvers in private life as lifelong learners. Schools provide the optimal setting for assuring that all citizens acquire competence in knowing how to learn (Doyle, 1992, p. 2).
Embedded throughout the discussions of Constructivism is the principle which stresses that assessment be authentic and interwoven into teaching. What we now know about learning indicates that assessment and learning are closely and intimately tied . “The performance assessment movement has become a tremendous force in American education” (Marzano, et al., 1993, p. 43). Marzano, et. al. further assert that, “the last decade has witnessed a growing recognition of the need for significant changes in educational assessment practices. The calls for reform are directed not only at large-scale, standardized tests, but also at classroom assessment practices” (p. 9). These authors become more precise when they indicate that identifying specific content and lifelong learning standards is an important part of the assessment revolution in American education. This goes hand in hand with planning and delivering instruction that takes into account the Constructivist nature of learning (Marzano, et al., 1993).
In lookingat how Constructivism impacts learning, there are three key areas: (1) curriculum, (2) instruction, and (3) assessment. In terms of the curriculum, “Constructivism calls for the elimination of a standardized curriculum” (Funderstanding, 2004). Instead, constructivism suggests using a curriculum that is customized to each student’s prior knowledge and understanding utilizing a hands-on approach. Throughout the course of instruction, teachers focus on making connections between facts and fostering new understanding in students. This can be facilitated through the use of open-ended questions that allow for extensive dialogue among students (Funderstanding, 2004). As for assessment, Constructivism calls for the elimination of grades and standardized testing. Students are involved in the assessment process throughout the course of learning activities. (Funderstanding, 2004).
In review, there are eighteen characteristics of the Constructivist design of learning. (Murphy, 1997). These include:
Multiple perspectives and representations of concepts and content are presented and encouraged.
Goals and objectives are derived by the student or in negotiation with the teacher (rubrics).
Teachers serve in the role of guides, monitors, coaches, tutors and facilitators.
Activities, opportunities, tools and environments are provided to encourage metacognition, self analysis-regulation-reflection-awareness.
The student plays a central role in mediating and controlling learning.
Learning situations, environments, skills, content and tasks are relevant, realistic, authentic and represent the natural complexities of the real world.
Primary sources of data are used in order to ensure authenticity and real-world complexity.
Knowledge construction and not reproduction is emphasized.
This construction takes place in individual contexts and through social negotiation, collaboration and experience.
The learner’s previous knowledge constructions, beliefs and attitudes are considered in the knowledge construction process.
Problem-solving, higher-order thinking skills and deep understand are emphasized.
Errors provide the opportunity for insight into students’ previous knowledge constructions.
Exploration is a favored approach in order to encourage students to seek knowledge independently and to manage the pursuit of their goals.
Learners are provided with the opportunity for apprenticeship learning in which there is an increasing complexity of tasks, skills and knowledge acquisition.
Knowledge complexity is reflected in an emphasis on conceptual interrelatedness and interdisciplinary learning.
Collaborative and cooperative learning are favored in order to expose the learner to alternative viewpoints.
Scaffolding (bridging) is facilitated to help students perform just beyond the limits of their ability.
Assessment is authentic and interwoven with teaching.
Essentialism
In sharp contrast to Constructivism is the Essentialism learning philosophy. Ideas of essentialism go back to the time of Plato, who believed the purpose of schooling was to help students succeed in the world as it was. Essentialism is a conservative philosophy whichsuggests that acquisition of basic academic skills and knowledge and moral development be taught to all students though traditional disciplines such as reading, writing, mathematics, and computers. (Butler, n.d.). Students are required to master a basic body of knowledge and information delivered by the teacher (Thompson, 1999). Teachers serve both as the academic and moral role models. Scaffolding provides the means for acquisition of skills in such a way that students move from less to more complex skills. Essentialist programs are pragmatic and academically rigorous for all types of learners (Butler, n.d.). Given the rigorous nature of this philosophy, acquisition of skill knowledge does not allow for the interest of the individual students (Philosophy of Education, n.d.).
This philosophy also accepts and promotes the social, political, and economic structure of the American society. Essentialists believe that teachers should instill such traditional American virtues as respect for authority, perseverance, commitment to duty, and consideration of others. Character education programs are built around this premise. Upon completion of an academic program, students are expected to possess basic skills and an extensive body of knowledge, along with a disciplined and practical mind(Philosophy of Education, n.d.). Also paramount to the Essentialism philosophy is that students be prepared to take a variety of tests with different formats. (Butler, n.d.).
The current wave of reform efforts are grounded in the Essentialism philosophy. (Thompson, 1999). Take for example, the report titled, A Nation at Risk. This report reflects the Essentialism view in that it calls for more rigor in the academic program, an extended school day, a longer academic year, and more challenging textbooks (Butler, n.d.). In addition, the mandates stemming from No Child Left Behind have forced educators to shift their thinking toward that of basic skill education or a back to the basics emphasis in terms of content delivery.
An Essentialism classroom would be oriented around the teacher who serves as an intellectual and moral role model; or the sage on the stage mentality. The teachers or administrators decide what is most important for students to learn and place little emphasis on the interest of the students, especially if these interests impede the focus on the academic curriculum (Butler, n.d.). Essentialists believe that upon completion of the academic program, students will leave school with disciplined minds that are capable of applying what they have learned in a real world context (Butler, n.d.).
Similar to the Constructivism philosophy, Essentialists emphasize technological literacy because it will help students fit into society upon completion of the academic program. In this way, they are able to become contributing members of the community and society as a whole.
Conclusion
After conducting research, it appears that the philosophies of Constructivism and Essentialism are at direct odds with one another in some respects. Constructivism is highly student centered, while Essentialism is teacher centered. Constructivism is built around the interest of the students versus the Essentialism philosophy that sacrifices student interest for the sake of content coverage.
In terms of similarities, technology and lifelong learning are recurring themes within the frameworks of both of these philosophies. Constructivism and Essentialism both subscribe to the tenet that it is the role of the teacher to prepare students to become lifelong learners in our ever-changing 21st Century.
In order to meet the needs of all the academically diverse students that we now encounter in our differentiated classrooms, effective teachers will utilize different teaching styles for different learners and apply different theories to different contexts. Constructivism and Essentialism are both to viable options from the pool of learning theories that can be tapped into to ensure that all students’ learning needs are being met.
References
Butler, J. D. (n.d.) Educational Philosophy. Retrieved on 4-27-05 from
Collay, M. & Gagnon, G. Constructivist Learning Design. (2004). Retrieved on February 20, 2004 from
Doyle, Christina. (1992). Information literacy. Retrieved on July 9, 2004 from
Funderstanding. Constructivism. Retrieved on February 20, 2004 from
Henson, K. (2001). Curriculum planning: Integrating multiculturalism, constructivism, and educational reform.(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Humes, Barbara. (2004). Using information literacy. Retrieved on July 9, 2004 from
Marzano, R., Pickering, D. & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Murphy, E. Constructivist learning theory website. 1997. Retrieved on 2-8-04 from
Personal Philosophy of Education.(n.d.). Retrieved on 2-28-05 from
Thompson, Tom. (1999). Philosophy of Education. Retrieved on 2-27-05 from
1