William James

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?