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.