And now the end is near…. We did it our way. Reflections on this module…

When I sat down to write this final blog I asked myself two questions:-

1) What do I think of this module?
I swapped to this module at the last minute, partly because I’d spoken to last years students and heard only good things about it, and to be totally honest, partly because there was no final exam – yes I am embarrassed to admit I was that shallow!! However, I’m so glad I made that decision as it has turned out to be one of the most, if not THE most enjoyable module in my entire university career. This module was how I imagined university to be before I came here, with lots of collaboration, an enthusiastic and invested lecturer, and an opportunity to learn in depth about something which I found facinating. It was a little daunting to begin with as its so far removed from so many other modules, and the absence of strict rules and guidelines meant that I was (at first), left wondering exactly what I was meant to do and which direction to go – however looking back I can see that what was absent was prescribed learning…Jesse just wanted us to go and find what WE wanted to learn about within the parameter of the psychology of learning and education … No wonder we all enjoyed this so much…we were learning what we wanted to learn!!

2) What did I learn?
Wow! Where to begin?
Firstly I have learned that I learn and retain far more information when it is a subject that I’m interested in – I actually feel that if I was examined on what I had written in my past 8 blogs I could pass with a good grade without even revising. Following on from that, after the stats/blogs debacle last year, I really didn’t see the value of blogging – I am surprised to say that I now think that blogging is an effective, valid, enjoyable, and stress-free assessment method… when it is used correctly.

I’ve also learned the value of doing presentations – I found that presenting really cemented my knowledge. I worked harder and made sure I truly understood what I was speaking about, as I wanted to be able to confidently answer any questions.

Concerning the subject matter of my blogs and that of everyones blogs I’ve read, it has really saddened me, as it seems as though our education system is failing…failing to deliver the maximum knowledge and skills to learners, and failing to adapt, accomodate, and proactively embrace 21st century technology and empirically supported knowledge about how we learn and the best ways to teach, ….. in short, the psychology of learning is being ignored.

One thing which I have noticed over the past weeks of reading everyone’s blogs, is that despite the wide and diverse subjects we all started with, as the weeks have progressed, the focus of all of our blogs seems to have ‘funneled’ into a handful of common themes eg. Assessment methods, delivery of education, and conformity. Has anyone else noticed this? It got me thinking about what a qualitative study of this would show – would an analysis of factor loading decrease from blog 3 to blog 8? Again on the subject of my blogs – constructivism- I’ve seen that it is not only effective in an academic setting, but, through proof-reading my blogs, my husband who is a helicopter crewman instructor, has applied many techniques to his ground and air instruction. He’s found that it has really highlighted the students who want to learn and do the job, and those who thought they could turn up, not work, memorise information, and pass (they have since found that they can’t!!). He’s found that constructively learned information allows for a deeper understanding, and an ability to apply that knowledge to different, seemingly unconnected situations.

What’s more, I’m such a good wife that I’ve decided not to charge him a consultation fee!!!

Where now?
This module has reignited my enthusiasm for learning. I hadn’t considered doing an academic masters degree (favouring more of a vocational masters in counselling psychology), however now, I’d love to study educational interventions – if children are struggling to learn, is the problem theirs or the way they’re being taught? Could a small change in delivery have a big impact on learning?Also, I’m now considering teaching as a profession – something I’d never done before. How can we expect things to change if we don’t get in there and do it ourselves?

To conclude, I cannot possibly list everything I’ve leaned from this module – it has gone way beyond learning about the science of education… I’ve learned how to learn instead of memorise, and I cannot thank Jesse enough for the opportunity to be a part of this revolutionary ‘new’ university education.

My Comments – Week 9

http://psuc18.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/to-summarise/#comment-136

http://rebeccaholder28.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/multimodal-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-56

http://psuc0e.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/reward-punishment-preventing-and-promoting-what-punishment-promotes-positive-performance-in-the-classroom/#comment-161

Synthesis Blog: The Power of Social Media In A Changing World

 

The Ins and Outs of Constructivism – A synthesis of what I’ve discovered.

What is Constructivism?

There is no easy and definitive answer to this. Constructivism is not just one entity, but has many facets including (but not only) Radical Constructivism, Social Constructivism, and Critical Constructivism. These are in essence different approaches to the same goal, and I think are best thought of as ‘Tools of Constructivism’. In the context I’ve been exploring it is a method of learning and educating. The emphasis is on how knowledge is created by the learner based on their prior knowledge and personal environment. So on the whole, constructivist learning is the process of a learner using their existing knowledge as a foundation and building upon it. This newly acquired knowledge is anchored in established knowledge, and in time, itself becomes a foundation for future learning.

Foundations & Mechanics

Constructivist learning has its roots firmly planted in psychology and biology.

Two major players were the psychologists Piaget and Vygotsky. Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development (schemata, assimilation & accommodation) I think can be applied to the neuropsychology of constructivism – backed up by Stich’s Theory of Connectionism explaining the neural and synaptic pathways of learning. Piaget suggests that we learn because we have developed. Vygotsy’s Social Development Theory (MKO & ZPD) goes some way to explaining the academic and social aspects of constructivism. Vygostsky proposed that we develop because we have learnt. Although they did have opposing views, both have credence in the explanation and development of constructivism.

All That Glitters…..

Nothing is perfect, and it’s the same for constructivism. Correct environment, opportunity for poor teaching, cheating, social loafing, freeloading, and assessment & evaluation are just some of the challenges constructivism can present. This said, a deep and genuine understanding of constructivism, some lateral thinking, and a willingness & ability of the teacher/educational establishment to change and adapt, can see these problems quickly and easily address.

Constructivism in Action

There is no such thing as a constructivist teacher. An educator who has a ‘constructivist classroom’ is a facilitator of learning. Students sit in groups and discuss topics and ideas. Learning may not even take place in a classroom environment – it could be at home, in a library, or even utilize Skype (other video call providers are available!) for discussion. With constructivist learning there are very few environmental boundaries that cannot be overcome.

How Can Subjective Knowledge be Assessed?

Because a constructivist learner draws on their own experience and knowledge to learn, what people learn will differ… meaning learning cannot be assessed with a standardized test (such as an MCQ), as everyone’s answers would be different. Methods such a blogging, student led assessment, simulation, projects, portfolios, peer assessment, oral presentations, and anecdotal records can be used to assess constructivist learning…so constructivist knowledge CAN be assessed, we just need to adapt and alter the methods.

But Is Constructivism Better Than a Traditional Classroom?

Yes….and no! There is still a place for traditional methods of teaching. Constructivism requires the learner to already have a foundation of knowledge – and this is where traditional education comes in. For instance, in subjects such as maths, a ‘times-table’ must be learnt…it is not open for individual interpretation, but once a person has the foundations, constructivism allows them to build upon it themselves.

Benefits of constructivism include:

  • More learning takes place if a learner is actively involved rather than a passive listener.
  • It encourages thinking and understanding, not rote memorization.
  • Constructivist knowledge is transferable.
  • Constructivist learners ‘learn how to learn’ by themselves without the need for a teacher to impart knowledge – this is good preparation for ‘life’.
  • Constructivist students learn to question and critique – a transferable and useful life skill.
  • Constructivism promotes social and communication skills, negotiating with others and appreciating the value of others differing ideas.

My Thoughts on What I’ve Learned about Constructivism…

Although I had experienced a constructivist learning environment, I didn’t actually know about the existence of constructivism before this module. I think that there is not only a definite place for constructivist education, but a genuine need, for the diversity and creativity of thought it promotes within learners. Throughout my investigations I have become increasingly surprised and disappointed that this method is still struggling to find its place in the education system, and, with so much supporting evidence and such few (scientifically supported) criticisms, I can only conclude that this is due to inertia, fear, or perceived cost by the governing bodies of education.  The world is not the same place as it was 50 years ago (Vygotsky’s theories were published in the West in the early 1960s) – so why are we educating the in same way? The 1950s saw the invention of fibre optics (1955), computer hard drives (1956), computer modems (1958), integrated circuit (1958), and the microchip (1959). The fact that we are not doing all this with a pen and paper using information from a library… shows that we have taken these discoveries, used, and advanced them – but sadly the same cannot be said for education. To me it seems that more teachers, educators, educational establishments, and more importantly educational governing bodies, need to ‘do their homework’, understand what’s out there, and not be afraid to stick their head above the parapet, to use and advance discoveries in education to bring a better and more 21st century appropriate education to our children and learners, because this failure to adapt and grow education delivery is  teaching conformity, fear of change, fear of being an individual, and fear of doing the right thing.

References

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index_sub6.html

http://inventors.about.com/od/timelines/a/modern.htm

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/an-introduction-to-constructivism-the-cognition-of-learning-knowing-how-we-learn/

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/constructivist-learning-part-deux/

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/can-you-teach-constructivist-learning/

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/constructivism-one-size-fits-all/

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/the-neuropsychology-of-constructivism-abridged/

https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/what-puts-the-con-in-constructivism/

What Puts the ‘Con’ in Constructivism?

As promised, this week I’m going to cover the disadvantages and problems that constructivist learning can present. Nothing can be all good (even chocolate [good] has calories [bad]), but it’s a case of weighing up the pros and cons, and making a decision from that.  These are just a few of the drawbacks of constructivist learning (and ways of reducing them):

Environment – The constructivist-learning environment can present problems in many ways. One way is that students may misbehave or not concentrate on the task at hand when they are in ‘learning groups’. To help counteract this, the teacher must establish new acceptable norms for behaviour (Glasersfeld, 2003), for example in a D.I. class, talking amongst students is rarely acceptable, however in a constructivist setting discussion is essential.

Opportunity for Poor Teaching – It would be very easy for an uncommitted, a poorly prepared or insufficiently trained teacher to give a class a subject, tell them to break off into groups and learn about it and discuss it for an hour. Yes, this employs some constructivist techniques, but what about Vygotsky’s MKO and ZPD (See my previous blog)? As Steffe and Wood (1991) point out, the teacher must know when to step in and redirect a groups’ thinking, or add to a debate which has stalled.

Cheating – Constructivist learning and assessment lends itself very well to cheating.  Sheard, Carbone, & Dick (2003) found that half of the students they surveyed had cheated. However, it is worth noting that these students were first year college students and had little prior subject knowledge upon which to build, so in this case, the cheating could be attributed to using a constructivist approach with unprepared students (Lister & Leaney, 2003).

Social loafing & Freeloading – Without the direct guidance of a teacher, there is the opportunity for individuals in a group to ‘academically loaf and freeload’ (Rensburg, Grobler, & Clarke, 2012), not pulling their weight and relying on others to come up with ideas. Of course, this may only a short-term gain for the freeloader, as any individual assessment will highlight their lack of investment in learning, and Lamal (1978), found that children will choose not to freeload if reinforcers are readily available – to me this means that there is a need for the teacher/educational establishment to regularly and frequently acknowledge the learning, for example with verbal feedback or as academic grades (just like our weekly blog grades????).

Assessment & Evaluation – Traditional exams are largely memory based, testing how much a student can remember from their lessons. However, constructivist learning is very subjective because knowledge is constructed form an individuals own prior knowledge and experiences…so how can a single type of test be accurate at establishing a students level of learning? Standardized tests such as MCQ’s cannot be used because Billy might have learnt that the most valuable thing on earth is a diamond, but Sheldon might have learnt that the most valuable things are Hulk hands…

Neither is right or wrong, as what they have learned is subjective, meaning that evaluation methods must be adjusted. Jonassen (1996) suggested 10 criteria of constructivist evaluation:

  • Be goal free
  • Be based on authentic tasks
  • Be driven by the context
  • Assess knowledge construction
  • Assess experiential constructions (process vs. product)
  • Be dependent on the context
  • Include multiple perspectives
  • Be multimodal
  • Require socially constructed meaning
  • Be focused on the true goal of evaluation

and Agrawal (2007) proposed 7 practical ways of implementing these criteria:

  • Student designed assessment
  • Simulation
  • Projects
  • Portfolios
  • Peer assessment
  • Oral presentations
  • Anecdotal records

So to me the problem seems to be in the inability or unwillingness to alter assessment methods, and not that information which has been constructively learned is unable to be assessed.

I know I haven’t covered all the challenges a constructivist learning system presents, but I hope I have given possible solution to a few possible difficulties. I would really welcome any comments – especially letting me know of other problems with constructivism.

Thanks for reading.  🙂

References

Agrawal, M. (2007). Constructivism and pupil evaluation. Journal of Indian Education, 33(1), 16-27. http://www.ncert.nic.in/html/pdf/Publication/Journal2008/JIE/JIE_may07/JIE_MAY07.pdf#page=13

Glasersfeld, E. v. (2003). Problems of constructivism. In L. P. Steffe & P.W. Thompson (Eds.), Radical constructivism in action (pp. 3-9). http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=iM18PfvWr54C&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=problems+constructivism&ots=p0f-wrPLvo&sig=Lmh-TrqkjectgrVwsFRyBXJe35g&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=problems%20constructivism&f=false

Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lamal, P. A. (1978). Reinforcement schedule and children’s preference for working versus freeloading. Psychological Reports, 42, 143-149. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1978.42.1.143. http://www.amsciepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.1978.42.1.143

Lister, R., & Leaney, J. (2003). Bad theory versus bad teachers: Toward a pragmatic synthesis of constructivism and objectivism. Internation Conference of Higher Education  Research and Development society of Australia, 429-436. http://www.unhas.ac.id/hasbi/LKPP/Hasbi-KBK-SOFTSKILL-UNISTAFF-SCL/Mental%20Model/Bad%20teacher.pdf

van Rensburg, N.J., Grobler, M., & Clarke, N. (2012). Preparing for the solar challenge: Critical competences acquired in undergraduate engineering education. Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2012 IEEE, 1-10. doi: 10.1109/EDUCON.2012.6201141. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6201141

Sheard, J., Carbone, A., & Dick, M. (2003).  Determination of factors which impact on IT students’ propensity to cheat. Fifth Australasian Computer Education Conference, Adelaide. http://129.96.12.107/confpapers/CRPITV20Sheard.pdf

Steffe, L. P., & Wood, T. (1991). Constructivism in the Classroom. Transforming Children’s Mathematics Education: International Perspectives. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 422-428. http://0-www.jstor.org.unicat.bangor.ac.uk/stable/pdfplus/749189.pdf?acceptTC=true

My Comments – Week 7

http://jmssol.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/methods-to-facilitate-academic-success-diet-and-exercise/comment-page-1/#comment-70

http://psuc18.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/introducing-technology-into-the-classroom-should-we-or-shouldnt-we/#comment-106

http://ekennedy92.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/entrance-and-exit-exams/comment-page-1/#comment-28

http://cressida29.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/an-alternative-view-of-iq-testing/comment-page-1/#comment-59

The Neuropsychology of Constructivism (abridged!)

So, by now we can all appreciate the constructivist learning / teaching is great! ;-), But HOW does it work? It was actually quite difficult to find any information of the “neuro -mechanics” (my shiny new made up word) of how constructivism results in learning – but here’s what I’ve found so far…….

With Piaget being one of the most influential psychologists in constructivist learning, I thought I’d have a look at his Theory of Learning or Cognitive Theory as its otherwise known (I’ve already briefly explored Vygotsky’s theory in my previous blog).

Firstly Piaget was mainly concerned with children, however, I think that his theories can be applied to adolescents and adults if they are tweaked slightly.

There are 3 components to Piaget’s Theory:

Schemas – The building Blocks

Adjustment Processes – Assimilation, Accommodation, and Equilibration.

Stages of Development – Sensorimotor, Preoperational, Concrete operational and Formal operational.

(McLeod, 2009)

I’m only interested in the first two, as these are the ones concerned with the acquisition of knowledge.

Briefly –

Schema are not observable, they are the processes of the nervous system which form the ‘cognitive building blocks’ or ‘structures’ which allow people to cognitively adapt to their environment. They allow the individual to categorize stimuli.

Assimilation is the cognitive process of fitting new stimuli into existing schemata. These new additions do not result in a change of schemata, however they do supplement and enrich it.

When stimuli cannot be assimilated then accommodation takes place. This involves changing existing schemata to fit the current stimuli and allowing assimilation to take place.

Equilibration is the self-regulating process of using assimilation and accommodation to acquire equilibrium between the two. This demonstrates how equilibration employs assimilation and accommodation:-  (Clark, 2005; McLeod, 2009; Wadsworth, 1996)

 

Now I know that I haven’t gone into any depth with these stages, but they are well known, and easy to find on the Internet, so going over them again will not serve any purpose  – however I do want to explore HOW these stages work.

In the 1990s it was discovered that new experiences could stimulate the formation of new synapses, and since then neuropsychology has acquired a detailed comprehension of neural plasticity (Toomey & Ecker, 2007). As described in my previous blogs constructivist learning can be summarized as the acquiring of new information by drawing on ones own or some other trusted persons previous knowledge or experience to accommodate new stimuli into ones own existing schemata, and the theory of ‘connectionism’ fits nicely alongside this (Stitch, 1983).

So tying the two together when stimuli is received by the brain, it will try to retrieve and use a memory (neural decoding) in which this stimuli has previously featured in order to anticipate the outcome (Dayan & Abbott, 2001). The new data is transferred along neural pathways and to first and second layer cells in hope of modifying existing synaptic connections pertaining to prior applicable knowledge – This ties in with assimilation. If there is none, then accommodation must take place and new synaptic connection or dendritic linkages are created to accommodate the new stimuli. These new neural pathways will allow the 2 –way flow of information permitting assimilation to occur for further similar experiences. Tortora & Grabowski (1996) suggest that new information is stored in the short-term memory and it is some time before neural changes occur and the information is accommodated into long term memory. They also propose that as a person ages, unused synaptic connections are ‘closed’ and more frequently used ones are strengthened – BUT they can be ‘reopened’ thanks to brain plasticity.

Now I know this is VERY simplified, but to me it suggests that even the brain works in a constructivist manner. I’m inclined to agree with Tortora & Grabowski, as from personal experience I have found that it is a lot harder to learn as you get older, but it can be done with of hard work. The connectionist theory, seems a plausible explanation but very simplified, however it does not take into account details such as neuron types, hormones, NT’s, etc. and it can’t explain rule based learning (as you would find in mathematics or physics for instance).

So to conclude, I think I’m a BIT further forward in knowing how constructivist learning happens … but I still feel like there’s a lot missing from the explanation, and feel a bit like I’m just left with the theory I started with.

If you’ve got this far..WELL DONE! I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

References

Clark, J. (2005): Explaining learning: From analysis to paralysis to hippocampus. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(5), 667-687. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2005.00150.x

Constructivist Learning – part deux. https://sarahjpeach.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/constructivist-learning-part-deux/

Dayan, P., & Abbott, L. (2001). Theoretical neuroscience: Computational and mathematical modeling of neural systems. Cambridge: MIT Press

McLeod, S. A. (2009). Jean Piaget | Cognitive Theory. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html

Quartz, S. R., & Sejnowsky, T. J. (1997). A neural basis of cognitive development: A constructivist manifesto. Behavioural Brain Sciences, 20, 537–556. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.164.2894&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Stitch, S. (1983). From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science: The case against belief. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Toomey, B.,  & Ecker, B. (2007): Of neurons and knowings: Constructivism, coherence psychology, and their neurodynamic substrates. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 20(3), 201-245. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10720530701347860

Tortora, G. & Grabowski, S. (1996). Principles of Anatomy and Physiology (8th ed.) New York: Harper Collins. https://llrc.mcast.edu.mt/digitalversion/Table_of_Contents_22446.pdf

Wadsworth, B. J. (1996). Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive and Affective Development (5th ed.). NewYork: Longman.

My Comments – Week 6

http://beckywebber23.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/just-how-much-stress-do-exams-cause-is-it-really-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-58

http://carysscienceofeducation.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/assessing-assessments-part-2-does-team-work-make-the-dream-work/comment-page-1/#comment-51

http://cressida29.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/differences-in-iq-heredity-vs-environment-issue/comment-page-1/#comment-50

http://sandsedsmyers.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/help-them-to-learn/comment-page-1/#comment-27

 

 

Constructivism – One Size Fits All?

No matter how good a ‘teaching method’ is – in this case ‘constructivism’, can that one method be used to teach any subject to any body? Personally I question whether the same techniques can be used to learn History and Astrophysics, and to teach a PhD student and a preschooler – I’d like to hear your thoughts on this…

(Although, we’ve already seen a preschooler constructively learning on the video in my last blog).

So my investigation into this question led me to discover that constructivism is not just a single entity – there are different types of constructivism.

Radical Constructivism – The process of an individual building, growing, and expanding upon their own knowledge. This form of constructivism is largely built upon the work of Jean Piaget  (Glasersfeld, 1990) – his principles stating that: –

  1. Knowledge cannot be passively acquired. It must be built by the cognizing being.
  2. Cognition is adaptive. The being will assimilate information that best fits within its own environment.

In a nutshell this means that ‘truth’ and ‘fact’ become only as strong as their own viability (Glasersfeld, 1989), and that each persons cognition and learning will differ from the next.

Social Constructivism – Builds upon Vygotskey’s theories in which the learner’s environment is utilized to construct and facilitate learning.  Applied, this could be small groups of students exchanging knowledge and critiquing each others ideas. This gives rise to inter-subjectivity (Rogoff, 1990)– a common meaning and knowledge formed from collaboration of all group members, which can then be applied by an individual, should similar information and situations arise in a community.

Critical Constructivism – Seeks to ‘iron out’ social, economic, cultural biases and any other historical artefacts, which can hinder learning (Taylor, 1996).  Fok & Watkins (2007) conducted a study, introducing constructivist learning into a Hong Kong classroom – where learning is typically by rote, and classes are teacher centred.  Critical Constructivism eradicated these historical artefacts, and results showed that all students achieved a deeper understanding, and increased self-motivation.

This list is by no means exhaustive, but there’s only so much you can cover with 500 words! But, it has shown me that there are so many different forms of constructivism that there’s got to be one suitable for whichever subject and to whoever is being taught.

Radical could be useful for older / more experienced students who already a large knowledge base from which to draw. Social, I think could be applied to many situations – but anything which would benefit from appreciating other peoples arguments and seeing things from all sides – Psychology as a subject stands out to me for this one, and, Critical as demonstrated by Fok & Watkins can be useful where external influences are hindering learning….

As an aside, I read a really good book called Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell (2009) which tells the story of Korean Air (an airline) who’d crashed so often and who’s safety record was bad, that they were almost banned from flying over or landing in Canada, and the US Army banned all troops from flying with them! Through analysis of the ‘Black-Boxes’ it was found that the Korean crew’s culture of unquestioning respect and deference to people holding higher ranks, was the fundamental cause of ALL the crashes – I know this is in a work setting, but it just goes to show what a massive impact historical and cultural artifacts can make.

So, actually I think I’ve just proved myself wrong! By its virtue of being an umbrella term encompassing so many different forms, I think constructivism IS suitable for any age, ability, or subject….

What do you think?

References

Gladwell, M. (2009). Outliers: The story of success. London, England: Penguin Books.

http://www.gladwell.com/outliers/index.html

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0141036257/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1362435508&sr=8-1

Glasersfeld, E. von, (1990).  An exposition of constructivism:  Why some like it radical. http://0-www.jstor.org.unicat.bangor.ac.uk/stable/749910?&Search=yes&searchText=2&searchText=Chapter&searchText=exposition&searchText=constructivism&searchText=radical&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DChapter%2B2%253A%2BAn%2Bexposition%2Bof%2Bconstructivism%253A%2BWhy%2Bsome%2Blike%2Bit%2Bradical%26fromHomePage%3Dtrue%26acc%3Don%26wc%3Don%26fc%3Doff&prevSearch=&item=1&ttl=441&returnArticleService=showFullText

Glasersfeld, E. von, (1989).  Cognition, construction of knowledge and teaching.  Synthese 80 (1), 121-140. http://0-download.springer.com.unicat.bangor.ac.uk/static/pdf/460/art%253A10.1007%252FBF00869951.pdf?auth66=1363724843_473069d1cce3d31f73188c973a9d2c9a&ext=.pdf

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Taylor, P. (1998).  Constructivism:  Value added.  In B. Fraser and K. Tobin (Eds), The international handbook of science education.  Dordrecht, Netherlands:  Kluwer Academic.

Wok, A. & Watkins, D. (2007). Does a Critical Constructivist Learning Environment Encourage a Deeper Encourage a Deeper Approach to Learning? The Asia Pacific – Education Researcher, 16(1).  http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/journals/taper/pdf/200706/Fok-watkins.pdf

My Comments – Week 5

http://suzzzblog.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/conformity-in-education-uniforms/comment-page-1/#comment-28

http://stephk91.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/stereotypes-in-education-gender-issues-social-class-and-environment-factors/comment-page-1/#comment-37

http://trudiiemma.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/are-we-stuck-in-the-industrial-age-in-regards-to-education/comment-page-1/#comment-28

http://tristanfialko.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/discipline-a-motivator-or-a-repressor/#comment-65