510

I don’t think multiple choice questions reflect constructivist values. However, the response that WISE provided gave you explicit feedback that would aid the learner’s understanding. This is more constructivist than a check mark.

In constructivist learning environments, students become more self-aware through reflection and goal setting. “Helping learners to become more aware of their thinking processes is thought by many, including Gagné, to be essential in the development of mindful, strategic behaviour or cognitive strategies.” (Driscoll, 2005). The notes you mentioned provide opportunities for reflection throughout the process which I prefer over writing one reflection at the end. Of course, the fact that you were able to brainstorm with a partner allows you to test your understanding against theirs which is a constructivist value. I think the program or teacher could add goal setting to the lesson.

It’s great that the program allowed you to go back and make revisions because after further learning, you may reject your original thoughts and want to reconstruct your assumptions.

That is strange that the program allowed you to move on without having completed a section. Perhaps, that aligns with the constructivist value that says learners have the final responsibility for their learning (Matthews, 1994). However, I’m sure a grade five student would be happy to finish the lesson without having to write out what he/she learned.

In terms of what Steve is saying, I think students need to be coached and have their learning scaffolded because ultimately, they need to meet the provincial learning outcomes. If they’re given a problem and allowed to take it any which way, they may not cover the material needed to meet those outcomes. I understand Steve is saying that as educators, we might be acting as too much of a crutch. When I think about the MET program, I appreciate that we are given assigned readings at the beginning of every week and specific questions to answer. If we were given a more open-ended problem without guidance, I would get lost in the sea of information. I also think the coaching helps students connect new information with prior learning which is necessary when beginning a new task.

Assessment of constructivist learning environments still confuse me, though. Luckily, I teach grade 2/3 so I have a large area to write comments on my students report cards where I can describe their progress and specific tasks they need to work on. They’re not given marks but have a bar which says, not yet meeting, approaching, meeting or exceeding expectations. This type of evaluation makes it easier to report on constructivist learning assignments. From grade 4 on, students receive marks which would be harder to give for problem based learning. The only thing I can think of to do would be to make some sort of rubric.

It’s unfortunate that many teachers who believe in constructivism are still forced to give exams or standardized tests to their students. That would be very frustrating for both teachers and students. Imagine being told you can collaborate and work on authentic problems in class but have to write long and boring multiple choice tests individually.

Driscoll. M.P. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (pp. 384-407; Ch. 11 – Constructivism). Toronto, ON: Pearson.

Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Rutledge Publisher.