Month: April 2023

 

For this assignment I research and designed a workshop curriculum centred around the phenomenon of communities of practice (aka ‘semiotic domains’ or ba). Check out the workshop website for further information.

Welcome

Welcome to my Research Café: Art as Constructivist Learning / Constructivist Learning as Art. Below, I’ve covered a few housekeeping related topics to get you started.

Navigation:

The easiest way to navigate through this Café is using the links listed in the top-left side of this screen. If you can’t see them, just click the three lines hamburger button ☰ and they will display.

Pages:

I have broken out the content of the Café into separate Pages. Navigate to the Pages link to see a list of the three subtopic pages:

1. Introduction & Overview

An introduction and overview that provides insight and sets the groundwork for what this Research Café is all about.

2. Reading(s) & Resources

Here you will find a list of the various readings I’ve collected and reviewed in preparation of this Resource Café. The readings are split up into different categories, with requirements indicated. I’ve also included a brief description of each to help you navigate through them.

3. Activities

On the Activities page, you will find a clear list detailing what is required of you in this Research Café.

Discussion Forum:

All participation in the Café will be shared/documented as posts and responses within the Discussion forum. There is only one Discussion forum for the Café, but as you will see, there are multiple ways to participate within it.

Questions / Comments / Contact:

If you have any questions or comments for me, you can either send me a private message through Canvas, or, feel free to post it in the Discussion forum if you feel comfortable doing so and think the answer would benefit everyone. I will be monitoring Canvas and the Discussion forum multiple times per day throughout the week and will respond as quickly as I can. I will also be participating regularly in the Discussion forum.

Etiquette:

Keep it casual. The design of this Café was intended to be fun and participatory, both within the Discussion forum in Canvas, and with the participants and their creative activity outside of the digital realm/Canvas. I am a social person, social constructivism is a key theme of this Café, and learning socially can make for a fun time. So feel free to use the Discussion forum in ways that are both academic in nature, as well as casual or conversational. That doesn’t mean that some posts must be academic, and some conversational (though if that’s what you want to do, that’s okay too), but do feel free to explore more open and relaxed forms of communication, shorter conversational responses as appropriate, or stream of consciousness styles of response.

Introduction & Overview

Key Words / Themes:

• Participation / Participatory Art
• Collaboration
• Social Constructivism
• Situated Learning
• Conceptual Art
• Relational Aesthetics

Art as Constructivist Learning / Constructivist Learning as Art:

This Research Café serves as an exploration in creative and experimental ways of teaching that are participatory in nature and informed by both cognitive and social constructivist principles. In this Café, we will look at examples of how studio arts education lends itself to constructivism (see the Pre-Readings listed on the Reading(s) & Resources page) but we will also see how constructivist-informed pedagogical practices themselves can be art. When I say this, I don’t mean that teaching is an art, I mean that a social project/activity/event of participants working together can itself be an artwork. A teacher may act as the facilitator, the students may participate at different levels, but the whole of the experience can be a collaborative work of art. Although it may often be the case, there is no requirement that art making results in an object. In fact, the most important element of conceptual art is the idea. Art can be ephemeral – it can be an experience, a process, or an event.

Art as an Idea

To help shift your thinking toward conceptual art, specifically, conceptual art that instigates action and provokes participation, I’ve listed just a couple examples of famous artworks where the core of the work is rooted in its concept. It is true that for each of these examples, something physical remains (e.g., a by-product, an instruction, documentation), but the part that most people might point to as the ‘art,’ either does not remain as its existence was ephemeral, or takes different forms depending on the participants involved.

• Sol Lewitt – Drawing Instructions

Lewitt is known for his giant, colourful and geometric wall murals – but did you know that many of these murals are actually by-products of Lewitt’s work? The actual ‘art’ is a set of instructions for the ‘drawings’. To display the work, galleries must first to create it by following Lewitt’s instructions.

Image of a wall drawing instruction for Boston Museum from: https://improvisedlife.com/2015/08/10/learning-stealing-sol-lewitt/

• Allan Kaprow – Happenings

Happenings were ephemeral events facilitated by Allan Kaprow. People could not attend to view the artwork, instead they were required to attend to participate in the work. The participants were seen as key elements in the creation of the artwork. Without them the artwork would not take form – it would not exist.

Image of one of Kaprow’s Happenings titled Fluids from: https://www.widewalls.ch/magazine/happening-happenings-performance-art

Pedagogy as Art

In this Research Café we will be taking a closer look at the work of Portland, OR based artist Harrell Fletcher. Much of Fletcher’s work as an artist is social in nature, and may be described as being part of relational aesthetics, an art movement that has the “tendency to make art based on, or inspired by, human relations and their social context” (Tate). Fletcher also founded and heads the Art + Social Practice, Master of Fine Arts Program at Portland State University.

The required reading (see the Reading(s) & Resources page) is a transcribed conversation between Fletcher and collaborator artist Lisa Jarrett about their project, KSMoCA (King School Museum of Contemporary Art). KSMoCA is an ongoing contemporary art museum that exists within Martin Luther King Jr. Public School in Portland, OR. The students of the school have the option to participate in running KSMoCA, and Fletcher and Jarrett’s under-grad and graduate students at PSU also participate, along with visiting and exhibiting professional artists. KSMoCA is an example of a situated learning, where the situation is brought to the students, providing access to specialized kinds of learning experiences that students may not be exposed to otherwise.

Image of KSMoCA inside of Martin Luther King Jr School, from: https://www.pps.net/domain/5197

 As part of the Activities in this Café (see the Activities page), you are asked to check out another artwork of Fletcher’s with collaborator Miranda July, called Learning to Love You More (LTLYM). This now concluded project ran from 2002-2009 as invitations to the public (anyone) to participate in and document their completion of regularly posted ‘Assignments’. The documentation of these Assignments is available on the LTLYM website, and resulting objects and documentation were also shown in major galleries where participants were formally credited as artists.

Screenshot of the LTLYM Website: http://learningtoloveyoumore.com/

Creative Practices in Education

The intention of sharing these examples through reading, exploration and participatory experience is to inspire education facilitators in different environments, serving varying age groups, to view their practice more creatively. To look at art education as a model for how education in other subjects and realms can be more socially constructive, and to reframe one’s teaching practice to see it as a collaborative work of art that is reliant on active participation to exist.

References

Tate. (n.d.). Relational aesthetics. Tate. Retrieved February 25, 2023, from https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/r/relational-aesthetics

Reading(s) & Resources

So, the reading list below looks extensive, but don’t worry! I have categorized the readings associated with this Research Café and how to approach them. For example: the pre-readings are sufficiently addressed with a quick scan, there is only one required reading and it is fun, easy and consequently, a quick read, and the optional/future supplemental readings are there for you to check out only if you want to. I’ve included descriptions for all to help provide direction as needed.

Suggested Pre-Readings:

(See the descriptions provided for each for further guidance).

1. Teaching Creativity in Art and Design Studio Classes: A Systematic Literature Review – R. Keith Sawyer

Sawyer, R. K. (2017). Teaching creativity in art and design studio classes: A systematic literature review. Educational research review, 22, 99-113. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X17300271

This paper provides a literature review of creative practices in arts education that point to constructivist learning. An overview scan is all that is required, with more focused attention to the findings identified on pp. 106 -111 that highlight the educational themes evident in arts education. This paper provides insight to the constructivist nature of studio-based arts education, yet through further reading/exploration in this Café, it becomes evident that studio practice is only one aspect of arts education.

2. Constructivism and Connection Making in Art Education – Judith Simpson

Simpson, J. (1996). Constructivism and connection making in art education. Art Education, 49(1), 53-59. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00043125.1996.11651424?journalCode=uare20

In this short article, Simpson relays how a constructivist approach lends itself well to arts education by allowing opportunities for the learner to connect with art history and art making through their own experiences and reflection of self. With this approach, art education can also be used as a tool to initiate connections to other subjects within a curriculum. This article is short, and can be scanned, yet the content is richer than the previously listed pre-reading and you may wish to give it more attention.

Required Reading:

1. Let’s Start with Kindergarten – Harrell Fletcher & Lisa Jarrett

Fletcher, H., & Jarrett, L. (2019). Let’s start with kindergarten. In H. Fletcher, & M. Sherman (Eds.), Shaped by the People: Conversations on Participatory Education (pp. 8–18). Pdxscholar. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/shaped_people/1

This chapter, found within the book, Shaped by the People: Conversations on Participatory Education (2019) is in the form of a conversation between Harrell Fletcher and Lisa Jarrett. The conversational format makes for an engaging and quick read. Although Fletcher and Jarrett do not explicitly discuss constructivism, their ‘art project’, the King School Museum of Contemporary Art (KSMoCA) represents an exciting and experimental method of education that is inherently constructivist in nature. KSMoCA is a contemporary art museum that exists within an operational public school. Students at the school have the option to participate in activities associated with the museum. Fletcher and Jarrett teach at Portland State University, and their undergrad and graduate students also participate in running the museum. This dynamic (and ongoing) project takes a social constructivist approach to engage with experimental and participatory situated learning that serves students and the community at various levels.

Optional Supplemental/Future Readings:

• The Creative Act

Duchamp, M., & Dachy, M. (1994). The creative act. Sub rosa. https://monoskop.org/images/7/7c/Duchamp_Marcel_1957_1975_The_Creative_Act.pdf

The notion that the completion of an artwork happens when it is perceived by the viewer is prevalent in art theory. An artwork itself may be what the artist intended, but the artist only has so much control in how it is perceived – it’s an idea that lends itself well to the constructivist notion that individuals each construct their own perception of the world. Marcel Duchamp, the artist often credited for initiating conceptual art, is also credited for popularizing this idea in his lecture, The Creative Act.

• A Pedagogical Turn: Brief Notes on Education as Art

Podesva, K. L. (2007). A pedagogical turn: Brief notes on education as art. Filip, 6. https://fillip.ca/content/a-pedagogical-turn

Podesva provides various key examples in modern art history of art taking the form of education itself. Each example presents art as something beyond a material object, but instead a social process, and presents education as something creative, and more than basic instruction – education itself is art. This article shows how relativist ways of thinking influenced art practices through modern history.

• Chapter 7 – A Constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Arts (from the Fosnot text)

Greene, M. (2013). A Constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Arts. In Fosnot, C. T. (Eds.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 110-131). Teachers College Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3545062

With this chapter, I was surprised to find that unlike with Simpson’s article (see above, in the Pre-Reading section) Greene took a more theoretical approach that manages to touch on many of the key aspects covered in a fine arts higher education such as semiotics, coded imagery connected to time and place, art as a language, rejection of binary opposition, inherent subjectivity/bias of the maker/viewer, and others.

• Chapter 12 – The Project Approach in Reggio Emilia (from the Fosnot text)

Forman, G. (2013). The Project Approach in Reggio Emilia. In Fosnot, C. T. (Eds.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 212-221). Teachers College Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3545062

I first read about Reggio Emilia in Fletcher’s (2019) book, Shaped by the People: Conversations on Participatory Education (see the Required Reading), so I was interested to learn more through Forman’s chapter in Fosnot’s (2013) text. The similarities between the example illustrated in this chapter and what Fletcher and Jarrett are doing with KSMoCA are evident, but pre-school children are the focus of this example. This chapter is a very short read, and could be covered in one of this course’s future assigned readings. If you were charmed and intrigued by KSMoCA, this chapter might be for you.

Activities

Listed below are the activities required for participation in this Research Café. Review this section in full before deciding which options to proceed with. The purpose of this engagement is to introduce you to thinking about Art as Constructivist Learning and/or Constructivist Learning as Art to inspire you to design creative pedagogies that are guided by constructivist principles and are participatory in nature.

1. After reading the Welcome!announcement, visit, read and explore the Introduction & Overview page to get an idea of what this Café is all about.
2. Visit the Reading(s) & Resources page. Lightly scan the suggested pre-reading and closely read the required text. Check out the optional supplemental/future reading if you have time, or just review the descriptions I provided.
3. Explore Harrell Fletcher and Miranda July’s (2002-2009) web-based project Learning to Love You More (LTLYM): http://www.learningtoloveyoumore.com/index.php
4. Watch this 2019 interview (approx. 26 min.) about LTLYM between Fletcher and July and SF MOMA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYMwcFpCFhI
5. Complete one of the following activities and post your response in the Café discussion:

      (Aim to complete this activity by Friday, March 10)

Activity A:

1. Complete any of the 70 Assignments from LTLYM

(Of note: The attention and time required for each of the Assignments varies wildly. Some could be completed in 15 min.-1 hr., others may take longer. Choose one that works with the time you have available).

2. Post documentation of your completed Assignment and provide a short reflection on your experience that connects back to the Café content, required reading, and/or any other content in the course to date. You may refer to the Guiding Questions (below) to help guide your reflection.

– or –

Activity B:

1. In consideration of the Café content, required reading and LTLYM, design a short learning activity (or ‘Assignment’) that is constructivist and participatory in nature. The learning activity should be something that could be completed relatively quickly by a classmate. It could be artistic, similar to those in LTLYM or could be creative in a non-artistic way and focused on a particular area of interest.
2. Include a brief rationale for your activity design and pull from the Café content, required reading, and/or any other content in the course to date. Post the activity instructions and rationale – use diagrams, images or external links as necessary. You may refer to the Guiding Questions (below) to help guide your rationale.

In the discussion, respond to at least one of the posts using either of the options listed below:

       (Aim to complete this activity by Sunday, March 12)

1. Respond to a classmates post by providing a brief yet thoughtful art critique (or ‘crit’)of one of the LTLYM assignments posted by a classmate. How do you connect with what they’ve posted? Does it relate back to the course content or this Research Café? Or does it make you think of something totally outside this course?

– or –

1. Carryout one of the activities (‘Assignments’) that another classmate designed and posted, and respond by posting documentation of the completed activity along with a brief reflection of your experience, pull from the Café content, required reading, and/or any other content in the course to date.

Guiding Questions:

The following questions are provided to help guide the written portions of your responses. You may choose to use them, or not if there is a different direction you wish to use in your responses.

• Do you believe Fletcher and Jarrett’s ‘art project’ at KSMoCA is an example of constructivist education? Do you think it goes beyond constructivism? Or do you think it’s something other than constructivist-informed learning?
• Is there anything about KSMoCA that you recognize as problematic? Or an element that could be improved upon?
• Throughout the Café content, and required reading, art is presented as a means to promote constructivist-informed education, but also education itself can be perceived as an artistic, creative practice. With this in mind, is constructivist-informed learning inherently creative? Can this way of thinking about creativity be easily applied to subjects other than art?
• With participation being a key theme in these articles, the connection to social constructivism is evident. How do you relate these kinds of educational practices to cognitive constructivism?
• Do you employ practices that engage participation, collaboration or situated learning in your role as a teacher? If so, share the methods and activities you use.
• Do you believe these kinds of participatory, action-focused activities (including Fletcher and July’s Assignments in LTLYM) inspire learning? Do you think they lend themselves to a constructivist-informed pedagogy? Does the artist’s intention/idea inhibit true learning?
• Do you find the examples provided inspiring? How so?
• The pre-readings focus on constructivist learning in a traditional art studio classroom setting. The required reading provides an example of arts education that takes a very different approach. Do you consider both pedagogies as constructivist? Is there a direction you see as being more beneficial to learners? If so, why? Considering both of these approaches, what elements would you consider/include if designing an arts curriculum?

A Constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Arts, Maxine Greene (2013)

Greene’s (2013) chapter is a poetic read that weaves constructivism into ideas about classic art history, contemporary art, and critical theory. Early on she highlights a key aspect that art makes use of visual and multimodal languages, or “symbol system[s]” (p. 115), but that the meaning of art, in whatever form it takes, is fluid, in flux, “provisional” because through a constructivist lens, each who perceives it, including the artist, does so through their own unique lens. There is a tension that exists when the artist and viewer share understanding through the interpretation of the sign systems evident in the artwork, yet concurrently are disconnected from being able to ever grasp the other’s perspective fully. There’s something lonely, yet beautiful about this, Greene states, “we know that, in decoding Moby Dick or The House of Mirth or Invisible Man, we are in some sense reading the texts of our own lived lives” (p. 115). As if to counteract the isolation that comes with being trapped within oneself, Greene explains how through arts-based languages communities of practice grow and evolve,

In the realm of the arts, as in other realms of meaning, learning goes on most fruitfully in atmospheres of interchange and shared discoveries…To reach beyond is to realize that there exists a tradition and a community of knowers, of seekers, none of whom has the final answer to any question, all of whom are engaged in a communal construct of knowledge. (p. 116)

The chapter concludes with an uplifting take on the inherent isolation of our own observations of reality, particularly our observations of art. Greene’s position is to celebrate the multiplicity of understanding that we collectively hold, and that art can invite, “this process, this opening of possibilities and plurality of interpretation enriches the object, feeds its potentiality” (p. 128).

Perspectives into Learning at the Workplace, Päivi Tynjälä (2008)

In contrast to Greene’s writing, I also read a far more practical research review titled Perspectives into Learning at the Workplace written by Päivi Tynjälä (2008). As a fine arts graduate who works as an educator in a government office, the selection of these articles is directly reflective of my own lived experience. Interestingly Tynjälä also focuses prominently on the importance of communities of practice within the workplace and how integrating with work culture, networking, and becoming a contributing member of a work team is essential to success. In an almost laughable juxtaposition to Greene’s views, Tynjälä writes, “the ability to learn in collaboration with other people, both within and outside one’s organisation, often makes the difference between success and failure. Employees who cannot network with others to share and construct knowledge will fall visibly behind their peers in the possession of such abilities (Slotte & Tynjälä, 2003)” (p. 135). Although harsh, there is truth to this statement – relying on one’s singular perspective, without constructing a more robust understanding through information gathered socially, is a very limited way to learn.

Tynjälä also stresses that workplace learning is not the same as academic learning. She explains that “while informal learning occurs as a part of everyday work processes and activities and produces mainly implicit or tacit knowledge, formal learning takes place in the context of organised training and learning activities and is meant to generate explicit, formal knowledge and skills” (p. 140). The paper concludes with a recommendation that more formal learning structures be implemented into the workplace to balance the largely tacit or informal learning that is most prevalent. In reflection, my own workplace appears to have taken this advice and is mid-way through building a formal education structure for staff, in fact, the existence of my role is a part of this initiative.

 

A Statement on Education, Revisited

As such a strong proponent for social constructivism, it is hard to believe it was not the core theme of my initial statement, but at that time I was thinking more broadly, less practically.

Greene (2013) and Tynjälä’s (2008) texts turned my focus to social constructivism through communities of practice. Greene’s interpretation guides the reader to understand the depth of language systems within arts culture that contribute to a community of followers extended through history. Tynjälä’s description is localized to the microcosm of the workplace and suggests that joining a community of practice within a workplace can enhance and enrich learning, while failing to participate can lead to isolation and negatively affect performance. Although the delivery of each perspective varies significantly, both share the same sentiment that learning and experiencing socially are advantageous; that building perspectives that are aware and welcoming of a plurality of perspectives makes us more connected, whole people. In some ways, as a naturally social being, I have already implemented aspects of this concept with the group of learning staff I provide training and mentorship for, yet my attempts at community building has been somewhat unconscious. To approach my work with intentionality, and with a more informed notion of what a ‘community of practice’ might look like, allows me to further cultivate what has been initiated to provide more meaningful and connected learning for staff that benefits the department as a whole.

References

Greene, M. (2013). A Constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Arts. In Fosnot, C. T. (Eds.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 110-131). Teachers College Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3545062Links to an external site.

Tynjälä, P. (2008). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. Educational research review, 3(2), 130-154.

I have incorporated my response into a Genially chart, embedded below, and linked here. First, I reviewed Sunal’s (n.d.) comparison on learning cycles, and compiled my own learning cycle, taking bits and pieces from the different ones represented. Within my chart, you can see my design and reasoning for each part of a cycle by clicking on the ‘+info’ button. In consideration of Reid and Valle’s (2013) chapter in the Fosnot text, I intended for my learning cycle to be inclusive of all learners, with the teacher/facilitator actively engaging and supporting each learner. Support may include allowing learners to participate in the ways that work best for them (e.g., using particular modalities, or with the assistance of helpful tools or resources).

The example can be explored in the chart by selecting the blue pin buttons. I chose an example that is specific to my role as a trainer within a government organization. I apologize in advance: as the information was going on a Genially chart, I wrote the description in such a way that would not provide explicit details of my role as I have to be careful what’s shared. To explain further in this context, the example provided is about teaching staff the role of the organization we work for and the specific authorities (set by legal documents, such as wills and/or provincial legislation) we operate under. This is a concept that at first seems simple, but often takes years to fully grasp, and is the source of ongoing questions throughout that learning period. Currently, I will admit, I do not train this concept in a way that supports constructivist learning, however using a constructivist-informed learning cycle framework may help staff to be more successful in grasping the concepts sooner. Firstly, by activating learners’ prior knowledge I would be able to gain an understanding of what knowledge they are building from to identify why they might be misinterpreting the concepts. Secondly, by initiating explorative learning, they are also learning how to be self-sufficient in finding their own resources and taking an active role in their training. I am excited to test this out with my next round of trainees!

References:

Reid, D. K. and Valle J. W. (2013). A Constructivist Perspective from the Emerging Field of Disability Studies. In Fosnot, C. T. (Eds.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 150-171). Teachers College Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3545062

Sunal, D. W. (n.d.) The learning cycle: A comparison of models of strategies for conceptual reconstruction: A review of the literature. http://web.archive.org/web/20160426173157/http:/astlc.ua.edu/ScienceInElem&MiddleSchool/565LearningCycle-ComparingModels.htm

What factors are likely to promote the restructuring of ideas? What factors hinder the restructuring of ideas? How can educators provide feedback to support learning?

In So’s (2002) study key aspects were identified for promoting cognitive restructuring in learners. First, “identifying student’s views and ideas” or in other words encouraging students to draw on their past experiences and prior knowledge to connect to the new learning, and next, “creating opportunities for students to explore their ideas and to test their robustness in explaining phenomena, accounting for events and making prediction”. These elements are evident in the Reggio Emilia pedagogy. Specifically, an aspect of the pedagogy known as revisiting, where “the children will recall a prior event, adding their collective memory to the here and now as they talk” (Forman, 2005, p. 215). Revisiting includes a social process where personal ideas of both shared memories and individual thoughts are openly discussed. Forman explains, “the teachers have taught them how to make their thoughts explicit by using representational media – drawing, clay, wood pieces, simulations, cardboard, and of course, their words” (p. 215). This creative and exploratory method of discovery applies to additional factors outlined by So (2002), “providing stimuli for students to develop, modify and where necessary, change their ideas and views” and “supporting their attempts to re-think and reconstruct their ideas and views”. The process of revisiting includes the reiteration of ideas through various mediums to allow student’s thinking to develop, shift and evolve through personal and social exploration – and teachers support this process by providing materials and facilitating activities such as taking location-based photos, sculpting with clay or using other 3d materials, and using the photos to facilitate schematic drawing. “The revisiting occurs in many cycles expanding the richness of the children’s teaching” (Forman, 2005, p. 215).

So (2002) suggests that teaching practices that are “teacher-centered” or “textbook-centred” obstruct constructivist-informed learning and are more focused on rote learning strategies. Drawing from a 1989 American Association for the Advancement of Science Report, So, restates that, “the present science textbooks and methods of instruction emphasized the learning of answers more than the exploration of questions, memory at the expense of critical thoughts, bits and pieces of information instead of understanding in context, recitation over argument, reading in lieu of doing”. The approaches used in Reggio Emilia reject the notion of learning that focuses on teacher or textbook and opts for action oriented creative experiences rooted in social collaboration. The Reggio Emilia approach is geared toward younger children, yet perhaps the same approach (or key aspects of it) should be integrated with high school and university curriculums.

Topping’s (2017) literature review on peer assessment provides a method of assessment that is conducive to constructivist-informed pedagogies. The study identifies that peer assessments, when incorporated into classrooms in thoughtful and strategic ways can produce accurate assessment results when compared with teachers’ assessments (pp. 3-4). Peer assessment practices also promotes a student-centred classroom environment that encourages autonomy and accountability in students. Pulling from a 2015 study by O’Hara and McNamara, Topping identifies that “during self and peer assessment, students developed skills as critical, creative thinkers, effective communicators and collaborative team workers, becoming more personally productive and effective” (Topping, 2017, p.8). Utilizing peer assessment, particularly in ways that allow for further revisions on projects after feedback is received, allows students to practice constructive criticism to facilitate their peers’ development while developing their own ideas and skills in tandem.

References

Forman, G. (2013). The Project Approach in Reggio Emilia. In Fosnot, C. T. (Eds.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 212-221). Teachers College Press.

So, W. WM. (2002). Constructivist teaching in primary scienceLinks to an external site.. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 3(1), Article 1.

Topping, K. (2017). Peer assessment: Learning by judging and discussing the work of other learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 1(1), 1-17.