Constructivism packages collectivist ideology with cognitive psychology to form a learning philosophy that has become “the latest catchword in educational circles” [34]. Constructivism is more political and social philosophy than it is learning theory. But, understanding Constructivism provides insights into how learners may construct individual meaning from social experience. Exploring the Construvisit philosophy also illuminates emerging trends in American education to use social engagement to influence individual thought and behavior.

This section will

• Review the constructivist philosophy.
• Explore debates among competing ideologies inside and outside the constructivist penumbra.
• Summarize emerging constructivist practices in education.
• Summarize fundamental theories that lay the foundation for the constructivist theory.

Assumptions

The basic assumption of Constructivism is that people acquire and refine knowledge and skills by constructing meaning while interacting with people and context [35]. This assumption aligns with Bandura’s social cognitive theory [22], which proposes that learning is the product of reciprocation among people, behavior, and environment.

Hein [34] stated that the core assumption of Constructivism is not new. It “represents widespread acceptance of [an] old set of ideas” that were previously stated by Dewey, Piaget, and Vygotsky, and Marx. Constructivism contrasts with behaviorist assumptions of learning as a product of the environment acting on a passive participant. Constructivism also contrasts with cognitivist assumptions that learning is in the mind, uniform across people, and acquired through formal instruction [2]. Connections and mismatches aside, understanding the constructivist philosophy offers insight into emerging trends and practices in the American education system.

Constructivism is more epistemology than theory. This means that Constructivism is a philosophy that attempts to explain the nature of learning, not an attempt to provide a scientific explanation of learning [2]. As a philosophy, constructivists can freely denounce all other theories without having to prove their own philosophy. Simpson [35] calls constructivism “a fallibilist theory.” This means that, to the constructivist, truth does not exist and cannot be discovered. Laws of nature are “merely the result of human activity” [35, p. 348]. No theory can be true because so many ways to construct knowledge exist. Knowledge is subjective, a product of personal cognition; the knowledge a person constructs is true to that person but may differ from the truth another person has constructed. Objective reality cannot exist because reality exists within the individual.

Making reality an individual construct pits Constructivism against Western intellectual traditions, which attempt to rationally organize and pass on objective knowledge to the learner [34]. To the constructivist, the Western approach is merely the ruling elite exploiting the masses to preserve its power base by imposing a false reality on the learner. To the constructivist teacher, reality, objectivity, and truth do not exist. Therefore the constructivist approach to education creates an environment through which individuals construct their own realities.

Disparate ideologies under the constructivist penumbra

Basic assumption aside, many radically different philosophies compete under the constructivist penumbra. “No one true way of constructivism” exists, Simpson wrote. Since not even science can find the truth, no one theory under the constructivist penumbra can claim to be true [36, p. 347].  The constructivist philosophies fall on a spectrum between personal Constructivism versus social constructivism [4, p. 291, 35, 2].

Personal Constructivism

From the personal constructivist side, Piaget’s [25] theory of cognitive development demonstrates the value of play. The child constructs learning as a lone scientist who adapts thinking with the environment; prior knowledge determines how the child constructs the meaning of unfolding events. Teaching from the individual constructivist perspective involves creating cognitive dissonance in the individual and facilitating new meaning based on experience, like in facilitated group discussions [4].

Social Constructivism

From the social constructivist side, Marxist theorist Lev Vygotsky offered a cognitive mediation theory that presented the child as an apprentice who actively learns by interacting with an adult mentor who provides the child with knowledge and cognitive tools. The child is not a lone scientist proposed by Piaget. Instead, the child is a collaborator with adults [13]. From Vygotsky’s perspective, individual and social processes are dynamically interdependent; learning occurs in a social context, is mediated by tools like language, and is best grasped by understanding the historical development of the individual and the species [36].

Teaching from the social constructivist perspective involves creating an environment that allows individuals to construct meaning by interacting in dialogue with others about shared problems [4]. Simultaneously, skilled members introduce culture to individuals [35].

On the spectrum between Piaget and Vygotsky are feminist views on knowledge construction, Kuhn’s scientific paradigms and revolutions, Von Glaserfield’s math education work, Dewey’s proposals on knowledge and experience [35, 37], and a reemergence of mysticism as a means of academic inquiry [38]. Common notions among these disparate perspectives identified by Gergen [37] are that learning occurs by

• Engaging with others.
• Critically assessing other perspectives.
• Exploring possible meanings that emerge through interaction with others and context.

Emerging practices

The basic assumption that learners build their own reality is a foundation for emerging practices in education. These include an integrated curriculum, the Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and the learner-centered principles developed by the American Psychological Association [2]. The role of the constructivist teacher is not to pass on knowledge but to create an environment in which participants collaborate to create meaning from available materials [4].

For example, in the Interactive Mathematics Program [39], the teacher presents a problem to the students and facilitates collaboration to solve the problem. Since no truth exists, the answer is less important than the collective process to create an answer. As a constructivist program, objective measurements are not valid because they cannot exist.

Framing the debate between Constructivism and Western intellectual tradition, San Francisco School System Director of Development Dr. Shoumen Datta [40], deemed IMP as “failing in rigor by most who value uncompromising scholarship; those who favor IMP are less impressed by rigor or scholarship and encourage the lowest common denominator.” Datta acknowledged that the social discovery process can serve a role “in the arts and humanities” or even as an “alternative” mathematics program. However, he argued that the practice does not provide learners with the knowledge and skills they need to compete in college and the workplace. From the constructivist perspective, competing in college and the workplace is a Western fallacy that must be deconstructed so the learners can construct their reality own reality to escape oppressive power structures. 

Vygotsky’s Cognitive-Mediation Theory

Lev Vygotsky developed the foundation for Constructivism [2] by proposing that individual and social processes dynamically interact to construct knowledge [36]. In other words, interacting with the environment contributes to learning, while prior learning influences the outcome of the learning activity [2]. While often presented in opposition to behaviorist assumptions that learning is an external process and cognitivist propositions that learning is an internal process, Vygotsky’s emphasis on learning as a dynamic interaction between both internal and external processes seems more complementary than contradictory. This section will explore influences on Vygotsky, then summarize, consider perspectives on, and explore current applications of Vygotsky’s cognitive-mediation theory.

The learner as an apprentice

Where behaviorist theory saw the child as a passive recipient of conditioning, and Piaget [26] saw the child as a lone scientist, Vygotsky saw the child as an apprentice. The child as an apprentice learns by collaborating with an adult mentor. The adult mentor provides the child with knowledge and cognitive skills [36] that accelerate the potential of the child [13].

Fueling Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive-mediation was the idea that individual and social processes are dynamically interdependent. Vygotsky held that human development [36]

• occurs in a cultural context;
• is mediated by tools like language, and;
• are best understood by considering the historical development of the individual and the species.

Levels of analysis

Vygotsky proposed three levels of analysis for cognitive mediation theory: ontogenetic, historical, and phylogenetic [14].

Ontogenetic level

On the ontogenetic level, understanding individual development requires understanding the history of the individual’s development. The tools individuals acquire come from culture and the previous learning of the species. Individuals acquire cognitive tools, like language, through conditioning. However, once the individual acquires a tool, the tool mediates between the environment and the individual leading to higher-order cognition [13].

Historical level

On a historical level, understanding an individual’s developmental history requires understanding the historical evolution of the individual’s culture [14]. Society passes culture to children through adults. Culture incorporates with an individual’s cognitive process as tools that influence development [13]

Phylogenetic level

On a phylogenetic level, understanding the historical evolution of an individual’s culture requires an understanding of the evolution of the individual’s species [14]. Vygotsky believed that people share lower mental functioning with other animals but that humans are different because they have the psychological tools to think [2]. To Vygotsky, the influence of culture is more profound than social influence and conditioning; individuals cannot function as adults without culture providing the necessary tools for being an adult. As summarized by M. W. Watson, [13] “A colt is already a horse; a human baby is only a candidate to become a human being.”

Themes

Two major themes contributing to cognitive mediation theory are the internalization process and the zone of proximal development.

Internalization

Vygotsky believed that adults help children regulate themselves until they have developed the internal mediators for regulating themselves without the adults. Learning first occurs on the social level. The child observes the adult, or the adult instructs the child. Then, learning occurs on the psychological level; the learning becomes part of the child [13]. Vygotsky saw internalization as that which separated humans from animals [14].

Zone of proximal development

Where Freud and Piaget saw developmental stages, Vygotsky saw zones of proximal development. No single point of development exists; development occurs within a range. Vygotsky proposed a zone rather than a clear course to account for environmental factors that prevent an individual from developing to potential.

Environmental factors inhibiting development might include inadequate instruction or attempting to teach a subject the child is not capable of grasping [14, 13]. Individuals progress through their zone by developing new skills. As the individual masters higher skills, the zone dynamically progresses along the individual’s developmental course. In other words, the more skills a person learns, the more the zone progresses.

An individual does not have a single zone that spans all skills but has a different dynamic zone for each domain. For example, a child will have different zones for various academic skills, music skills, athletic skills, social skills, etc. Each individual will progress at different rates than other individuals, and the span of the zone will differ among individuals. The mechanisms fueling development are the cues, instructions, and help of others. The individual internalizes these lessons until they become part of the individual [13].

Contributions

The critical contribution Vygotsky offers educators is that learning is not an isolated process but takes place in a cultural-historical context [2]. This idea helps educators adjust instructions to match the zone of proximal development within a classroom to meet the developmental needs of individual students.

For example, people from different cultures learn differently, so a single teaching style is not likely to work equally when applied among students from different cultures. Understanding the cultural-historical influence on learning helps educators adapt teaching styles to the culture of the learner.

Addressing the challenge of applying Vygotsky’s ideas in education environments, Watson [13] says, “A good teacher is someone who can determine the appropriate help to give a student at an appropriate level on a task, with the right amount of examples. A good teacher must also know when to withdraw help” to keep challenging the student to progress [13, p. 199].

Vygotsky’s theory has some significant limitations to consider. Malcolm Watson said that the zone is a metaphor that is hard to test. Also, assessing an individual’s dynamically changing zone is an elusive process. In other words, while cognitive-mediation theory can serve as a general guide to development, it lacks the precision to serve as a map.

In addition, Schunk [2] argued that some of Vygotsky’s key claims about the influence of the social environment on learning seem to be overstated. Research shows that children often figure things out before the culture has an opportunity to influence them. Also, children seem to have a biological predisposition to grasp concepts that do not depend on social factors. Overstatements aside, culture does appear to be a critical factor in understanding learning.

Resurgence

Vygotsky introduced a contextual and cross-cultural perspective to learning theory that seems to merge more than conflict with other learning theories. Behaviorists like Skinner focused on how the environment influences the individual. Cognitivists like Piaget saw that learning is an internal process, focusing on leaving individuals alone to develop at their own pace.

Vygotsky saw that internal and external factors interact. Learning happens as a person masters a new skill under the guidance of others who operate at the advanced edges of the learner’s developmental zone. Adult mentors focus on cooperative learning that brings about the development of individuals and their environment.

As a dynamic process, Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development cannot be measured. Also, his focus on the social environment as the source of learning seems to be overstated. Regardless, his ideas have served as the foundation of Constructivism and have found applications in learning environments in education and business.

Applications of constructivism

Constructivism offers a philosophy that sees learning as a means by which people acquire and refine knowledge by constructing meaning with people and context. The constructivist sees knowledge as something that is formed inside an individual within a context. Opposed to the traditional learning practices, the constructivist learning environment attempts to use social interaction, student activities, and assessments that engage students in constructing deep learning and creating their own realities. Tools used in a constructivist environment might include class discussions, students as teachers, and collaborative learning.

Practical applications of the constructivist theory include scaffolding, reciprocal teaching, peer evaluations, apprenticeships [2].

Scaffolding

In scaffolding, the teacher carefully guides the student through the initial stages of learning, then gradually removes support as the student progresses toward independence.

Reciprocal teaching

In reciprocal teaching, the teacher models the correct behaviors and provides the foundational knowledge to a group of students, then takes the student role as each student turns teaching the group.

Peer collaboration

In peer collaboration, a group of individuals, each with assigned responsibilities and requisite capacity, work together to complete a task, learning from the social interaction.

Apprenticeship

In an apprenticeship, an expert mentor guides a novice through joint activities until the novice can act independently from the mentor. Student teaching programs and on-the-job training programs are examples of apprenticeships.

Situated cognition

Vygotsky’s work also serves as the foundation for activity theory, also known as situated cognition. Defining learning as subject, object, and mediator, AT combines the individual and social in understanding an activity [4].

Learner-Centered Principles

The APA Learner-Centered Principles offer guidelines for reforming schools from a constructivist perspective [2]. Behaviorist practices focus on conditioning habits to elicit desired behaviors. Cognitive practices focus on explaining learning through physiological factors. In comparison, LCP focuses on the psychological factors that the APA sees as being “internal to and under the control of the learner.” The objective is to “deal holistically with learners in the context of real-world learning situations” [41, p. 2].

LCP principles offer an approach opposed to conditioning habits and physiological factors that might be used in behaviorist and cognitive environments. The Learner-Centered environment puts the teacher and classmates in the role of partners in making each student feel connected by making learning relevant. As summarized by the Center of Development and Learning [42]. “In a learner-centered school, education is done ‘with’ instead of ‘to’ the students” [42, p. 1].

Refective teaching

Reflective teaching serves as another example of constructivist learning theory in practice by considering students, context, psychological process, learning, motivation, and student knowledge. The reflective teacher develops personal and professional knowledge, planning strategies, and assessment skills.