R8

Quote: One of the most eye catching quotes in the Vygotsky article was the following: “We give children a battery of tests or a variety of tasks of varying degrees of difficulty, and we judge the extent of their mental development on the basis of how they solve them and at what level of difficulty. On the other hand, if we offer leading questions or show how the problem is to be solved and the child then solves it, or if the teacher initiates the solution and the child completes it or solves it in collaboration with other children – in short, if the child barely misses an independent solution of the problem –the solution is not regarded as indicative of his mental development…over a decade even the profoundest thinkers never questioned the assumption; they never entertained the notion that what children can do with the assistance of others might be in some sense even more indicative of their mental development then what they can do alone” (Vygotsky, p. 85).

Question: Do IQ tests really tell us much about students other than them being compared to other peers their same age? Vygotsky provided a great example of two students entering in school at the same chronological and mental age, but with guided instruction of knowing how to solve a particular problem, one student’s mental age jumped ahead four grades, while the other student’s jumped ahead one grade. As I reflect on that illustration by Vygotsky, I think about academic interventions that are implemented within the schools. Since research has made it very clear of the biases in standardized tests (particularly with individuals whose culture is not conducive to mainstream society), and educational professionals are aware of such factors, why haven’t the use of IQ tests been ruled out when diagnosing students with a disability, specifically, a learning disability?  

Personal Connection:  After reading the section on the zone of proximal development, I began to reflect on my current experience as a practicum student in the school system and what my future role as a School Psychologist will be. I think about how some teachers and other school personnel attend the Admissions and Release Committee (ARC) meetings and based on the student’s IQ score, they believe that the child should be a recipient of special education services. Instead of sticking a label on the child, what if interventions were made over the course of 6-8 weeks (before a special education referral was ever made) and the student’s progress was monitored to see if he responded to the interventions? On many occasions, the student will make progress. So, then was the child’s mental age (IQ score) an ‘end all’ for his academic progression? No; maybe he just needed differentiated instructions from the teacher to help him understand the material better. As William James stated, teachers should have varied instructions because one student will learn differently than another student. Students’ cognitive development also varies. As Vygotsky puts it, “the zone of proximal development defines those functions that have not yet matured but are in the process of maturation, functions that will mature tomorrow but are currently in an embryonic state” (p. 86). Therefore, all students should be given the chance to learn and not be judged by a test that produces a number and thus creates a form of pseudo-intelligence.

Outside Connection:  

The above video is a cute way of illustrating the zone of proximal development.

Module 4 Questions:

1.      Explain the principal contributions of Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory?

Unlike behaviorism in which external factors (reinforcers) are influential on behaviors which inhibit free will, constructivism is the exact opposite. In the context of learning in the classroom, constructivism would encourage students to teach themselves and to make their own meaning of their educational experience with teachers there only for guidance. The overall theme for Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory can be described as individuals actively learning and building upon existing cognitive structures through a process known as assimilation and accommodation.        

2.      Make a connection between Piaget’s stages of development and what James argued the teacher should know about cognitive development.

Ideas from Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory closely resemble some concepts described by William James. In his talks with teachers, James often suggested that teachers should be there for students as an academic supporter who helps to guide students as they make sense of their learning experience. This concept is directly related to Piaget’s theory. Alongside that, James talked a lot about assimilation in that we learn by taking a form of information that we already know and build upon those ideas to form new constructs, which is also parallel to Piaget in that he describes assimilation and accommodation as a means for organizing information into ‘schemas’.     

3.      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?

Airasian and Walsh might say that Bart Simpson was placed in a learning environment (new school) in which students construct their own knowledge in an academic setting. I believe that the structure of the new classroom was an example of constructivism as students seemed to teach themselves in the classroom while the teacher was there as a guide. When Bart first entered the school, the teacher told him that there is one rule for the school, which is to “make your own rules”; this is parallel to Piaget’s concept of students creating new knowledge structures (schemas) based on previously learned information.

R7

Quote: In the article written by Airasian and Walsh, I was drawn toward the following quote, “From one perspective, constructivism can be interpreted as a symbol of the emancipation of teachers from primary responsibility for student learning… the teacher will no longer be a supplier of information, but he or she will remain very much involved in the learning process coordinating and critiquing student constructions” (p. 446).

Questions(s): In reference to the quote above, I wonder what specific roles would change? How would this concept affect future teacher training? Will a constructivist instruction put an end to the pressures of raising test scores? I’d think so. If that is the case, would teachers become more satisfied with their jobs or become overwhelmed with the number of students on different ‘academic playing fields” within the classroom? When thinking about the idea of using concepts of constructivism within the classroom, there are many wrinkles that would need to be ironed out.   

Personal Connection: The way in which Airasian and Walsh peeled back the layers of constructivism as it pertains to the realm of education, was very insightful. When looking at the pros and cons of constructivism in the classroom, I believe that it is a great concept in that students would take charge of their own learning with teachers there to guide them through the process. However, I believe that implementation of this concept in the classrooms would inhibit not only the student’s academic progression, but could undermine teachers. America has become so stable in the very basics of facilitating education to students that if this was established in its totality, I believe education as we know it, would be obsolete; it would undoubtedly change the entire structure of how students are educated as well as how universities train teachers. Just as Airasian and Walsh described, there are many factors that should be taken into consideration.

Outside Connection: From my understanding of constructivism, the overall theme seems to truly embody the phrase “students are constructors of their own knowledge” (Airasian & Walsh, p.444), which implies that knowledge is constructed upon previous knowledge, or as William James would say, associations. The concepts of constructivism are almost parallel to how William James feels about how teachers should give instruction to their students. He states that students should be provided with an array of information or choices that will allow them to grasp an idea that makes an association with another idea that was once previously learned. In a sense, it seems as if William James pretty much tells teachers to present different means of instruction, allow students to take that information and ‘construct’ their own knowledge of what it means, and that teachers should be by their side for moral support.

I’ll end with this question: Is knowledge really in the eye of the beholder?