Constructivism - Science topic

Our new article explores how generative AI, when ethically implemented, can support educational integrity. By aligning AI with educational theories like constructivism and Self-Determination Theory (SDT), we argue that AI can promote personalized, meaningful learning and foster student autonomy and intrinsic motivation. Key ethical considerations are highlighted, including the need for transparency, respect for privacy, and fairness to ensure AI empowers students while preserving trust and data integrity. These principles create a foundation for using AI in ways that support, rather than undermine, academic honesty. For educators, this framework offers insights into reshaping assessment and learning practices responsibly in the AI era.

We invite you to read our article to explore these points in depth and learn how AI might become a valuable tool in fostering integrity-driven education.

Key Points and Discussion Prompts:

Below are the links to the paper on ResearchGate and Frontiers, respectively:

OR

What is your favourite and/or frequently used Research Paradigm to conduct research e.g Positivism, Constructivism, Interpretivism, Critical Theory etc... and why?

Do you also think there should be more paradigms introduced in the future?

Feel free to share your thoughts. There is no right or wrong answer. Your thoughts are valuable.

Thank you

I'm exploring different theories of language acquisition and how they explain first and second language learning. Universal Grammar (UG) suggests that humans are born with innate linguistic principles, while Behaviorism focuses on learning through stimulus-response and reinforcement. Constructivism, on the other hand, emphasizes the role of social interaction and cognitive development. How do these theories compare in terms of explaining language acquisition, particularly when learning a second language? Insights from both theoretical and empirical research are welcome.

Maybe not moderating between constructivism and privilege heritability.

Due to conservatism, especially social, more Trump presidency may lead to constructivism backed dysgenics, which could cause biological age to negatively correlate with chronological age.

Philosophical paradigms - seeking difference between interpretivism or constructivism, or are these one in the same?

Constructivism with privilege heritability(namely white privilege).

0)https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378124853_My_Current_Condensed_Political_Inclination

1)https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377182241_Dimensionality_dysgenic_trends_somatic_mutations_genetic_engineering_and_information_theory_all_support_constructivismwith_privilege_heritability_over_hereditarianism_I_welcome_further_elaborations

2) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380427514_Kalergi_and_Hart-Cellerand_Memetics_White_Antifragility

3)http://dx.doi.org/10.26775/OP.2023.07.21

No mutation can change an animal into a human and no gene is completely known to manifest into a trait.

0)

0.5)

1)

2)

3)

4)

Like Realism and Liberalism, Constructivism offers its own paradigm in the study of International Relation. Can Someone explain the main factor that facilitate or achieves intonational cooperation based in a Constructivism view?

If you consider circumstances like leaders, identity, beliefs, ideas, social norms etc., then please explain how that will lead to a corporation.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Ehssan

This is for an identity perspective analysis of international relations master thesis. I have researched so far some of the theoretical bases of those two, but I am trying to figure out a practical and if possible facile method of analysis for my first hand research that I need to do for the paper.

I would like to find out how I need to go about steps such as: finding the material, structuring of the material, comparative method, etc.

Can I have a brief explanation with some citations too

constructivism theory for training

Describing Three Seas Initiative in the light of constructivism should base on an examination of regional cooperation in the CE region in the context of two types of knowledge: knowing-that and knowing-how. In addition, it is significant to underline Azizov described the knowing-how and knowing-that approach as two different types of knowledge that are relevant in the context of international cooperation. Knowing-how is practical knowledge, related to skills, experience and intuition, and knowing-that is theoretical knowledge, related to facts, data and information.

International cooperation requires both practical and theoretical knowledge, because the ability to solve practical problems (knowing-how) is as important as understanding concepts and theories (knowing-that). Thus, the constructivist aim will be the examination of the current state of countries' approaches and their perceptions of the future form and meaning of 3SI.

I would like to carry out an evaluation process of the Three Seas Initiative based on a constructivist model. Hence my question - what in your opinion are the features of constructivism that can be used as evaluation criteria for 3SI? Which perspectives can be used to qualify 3SI towards this theory?

Hi ,

I am writing a research proposal for one of my units. My research topic is leadings factors of poor mathematics performance in Fiji. Though, I have chosen this topic, I am a little confused on what research paradigm will be more suited to this kind of research and also the research methods that will be more suited. I am also a bit confused when it comes to relating epistemology ad ontology to my research, together with positivism, constructivism and so on. Can someone assist me on what types of such methods and methodologies and paradigms will be more suited. As for me, I thought to use mixed methodology which includes a mixture of quantitative and qualitative research.

How can the learning theory of constructivism be used to help improve the reading skills of high school students?

Do you consider connectivism the new paradigm of learning and how does it affect constructivism in the contemporary digital learning environment?

Français

La plupart des théories de l'apprentissage et de l'enseignement sont basées sur le postulat que la connaissance est dans la tête ou le cerveau. Et si ce n'était pas le cas?

À mon avis, l'emplacement des connaissances dans la tête ou dans le cerveau est un postulat. Un postulat est un « Principe non démontré que l'on accepte et que l'on formule à la base d'une recherche ou d'une théorie » (CNRTL).

Good afternoon!

I am currently a master’s degree candidate studying Research and Evaluation in Education. I’m currently exploring the text Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology (Mertens, 2020). The premise of the text is to look at differences and similarities between research and evaluation. My undergraduate work is in Earth Sciences with a focus on research (specifically seismology and carbon emission connections). If “research is primarily empirical and evaluation is about drawing conclusions about merit or worth” (Rogers, 2014) is it important that we as educators are teaching both methods to our primary and secondary students? Or is one more beneficial to act as a building block to the education of future scientists?

After reading the text, as well as other literature on the subject, the fundamental purpose of research is to produce more generalized knowledge of a particular subject. Evaluation is the process of applying that knowledge to a specific topic. Research is more theoretical and controlled by the researcher, whereas evaluation is controlled by those commissioning the study. The two may be intertwined or independent of each other.

In exploring the four paradigms that frame research and evaluation, described as post-positivism, constructivism, transformative and pragmatic by Mertens (2020), I’m interested if you feel that one category is most suitable for engaging secondary science students? I’m leaning toward pragmatism, but would certainly appreciate your opinions and feedback. Do you feel that one paradigm is more reachable by secondary students?

I appreciate your time!

Best,

Annie Callahan

I am a graduate student at Arizona State University taking a course in research and evaluation in education. In our class, we are comparing and contrasting research and evaluation. After having read our text, (Mertens, 2020) Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, the author discusses the differences and parallels between the two. I had previously considered the two as interchangeable terms, or at least going hand-in-hand, however now there are evident distinctions that I can identify. The two do have overlap, but to me, research seems to be more of a process of uncovering and collecting new information in order to determine the "why" of a problem, scenario, or phenomenon. Evaluation, on the other hand, presents to me as a thorough process through which already available information is compiled to identify the "how well" or worth/value of an existing program or practice.

I am curious as to others' opinions on this topic. Do research and evaluation overlap, or are they singular and distinct? How are they used together? Must they be?

We are also discussing four paradigms that frame research and evaluation. Mertens (2020) describes them as post-positivism, constructivism, transformative and pragmatic. Do you feel that one paradigm would be more useful than another in carrying out research dealing with the efficacy of teachers of gifted populations based on their understanding of those students?

I think this is about applying various art forms in a constructivist way.

Hello, I have been struggling for quite some time with the operationalization of the "indigenous identity". The main idea is to set aside the primordialism - constructivism debate and focus on social practices. Any recommendations on that?

Many thanks

Good day

I am busy with my methodology Chapter for my doctoral thesis. There are quite a lot of contradictions and different interpretations of the concepts constructivism, constructionism and social constructionism and other combinations.

I have read many articles and book chapters already about these concepts, but still struggles to understand the differences. To name a few: Ackermann (2001), Crotty (1998), Gergen, Guba and Lincoln (1994) and Schwandt (1998; 2000).

Can someone point me in the right direction please?

Regards

Johann Pieterse

Given the fact that constructionism and constructivism are theoretical frameworks, does the pedagogical model of problem based learning more closely align with the constructivist approach as opposed to the constructionist approach.

You may refer to references about critical pragmatics and critical discourse analysis to help you answer the question.

Art needs to be integrated into the environment. Good creation comes from life and inspiration. How can artistic creation be better applied in constructivism through the construction of human activities?

As an art design teaching worker, I think constructivism paradigm will be more directly and clearly presented in the practical application of our teaching process. Constructivism is a psychological and philosophical point of view that individuals form or construct many things in the content they learn and understand (bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1995). It emphasizes the role of the interaction between individual and environment in the acquisition and refinement of knowledge and skills. Good design works and scheme presentation must be the construction of knowledge system in all aspects.

I made some photo albums to stimulate kids' interest in browsing the images, then I need to provide some books with characters, do you have any experience or research discovery share to me?

At the stage when preschool children are ready to enter the kindergarten, separation anxiety occurs from time to time, which deeply puzzles the parents and teachers of freshmen.

Whether we can apply any of the paradigms of post positivism, constructivism, transformative and pragmatism to the study of separation anxiety, so as to obtain effective research results and help children, freshmen's parents and teachers spend the early stage of school smoothly.

Looking forward to your discussion and reply, thank you.

Based on my current understanding of the four educational research paradigms of post-positivism, constructivism, transformation, and pragmatism, I think the constructivism paradigm is more helpful to me for the following reasons:

1. As a preschool education worker, I conducted the research on people (children, parents, community personnel) related topics, so the relationship between researchers and participants is a need to get the recognition and respect, and constructivism researchers pay attention to from the perspective of each person to get to know their life experience and experience in the complex world.

2. From the perspective of the nature of knowledge, the constructivism paradigm believes that the questioner and the questionee are interconnected and influence each other in an interactive process, and researchers strive to establish a relationship with the participants (Mertens, D.M, 2020). This kind of connection can play a positive role in research related to early childhood education.

3. On the research methods of it, constructivism mainly adopts qualitative method, such as interview, observation, data collection and analysis ways to carry out the research, the research method is suitable for the project to young children as the research subject, because there is an infinite development child could groups, their growth and behavior affected by many factors, such as Family, community, school, etc., so the observation and interview of relevant people can all contribute to the results of the study.

These are my views, welcome to join the discussion and exchange ideas.

I am currently studying educational paradigms and I am interested in Constructivist.

Based on the study of the educational paradigms, I believe that this paradigm has profound enlightenment, guidance and practice not only for educational research but also for my own teaching design.

Currently I am beginning research on different methods and strategies on how to improve students’ reading skills in primary school. If I want to use the research methods of constructivism to carry out this research, do you have any good suggestions or relevant materials or articles to recommend? I look forward to your reply.

In the study, the main skills are lexical resources, grammatical range and accuracy, connection and consistency, etc

In the research of ESL teaching, in view of the large number of research individuals, can I carry out quantitative research based on post positivism?

Grammar items can be acquired incedently through the natural use of language for communication, yet my learners do not respond well interaction-based activitie and they constantly ask for grammar based lessons where the rules are explicitly explained.

Hi,

I'm studying service ecosystem, I find critical realism is suitable to study different levels of aggregation in service ecosystems, the micro, meso and macro.

I want to argue for not using a pure constructivism ontology or a realist ontology.

Since service ecosystems are also complex adaptive systems and are developed by emergence. I find using CR is good since it looks at mechanism at many levels.

Why is constructivism not enough? or pure realism is also not enough?

I'm grappling with that. Thank you.

My perusal of the literature in the field shows that constructivism has been used majorly in studies on learner-centered instruction. Are there any other relevant theories, models or frameworks available?

My research title is : ( THE EFFECT OF AN AUGMENTED REALITY TOOL IN ENHANCING STUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT AND CREATIVE THINKING SKILLS?

I spent a lot of time reading several learning theories in order to choose the best theories to fit into my research variables and came out with: a dual coding theory, information processing system, social constructivism, cognitive constructivism, Mayer's cognitive multimedia theory, Gulfierd theory and situated learning theory.

I am so confused.

Hi

I want to develop a working framework for an injury surveillance system t be implemented in a specific organization.

Based on an implementation framework, I will follow the hereunder listed sequence (sequential mixed methods):

- understand the perceptions and experiences of the current situation from the stakeholders' POV (qualitative)

- develop the framework with the help of the stakeholders through a participant research design

- implement the framework and collect data (quantitative)

- evaluate the framework from the stakeholders' POV (qualitative)

In view of this, I through it would be best to approach it from the phenomenological constructivist POV.

Any opinions about this?

In science class room constructivist approach is useful

Greetings,

How do you think, whether constructivism relates to ontological or epistemological theorizing? As an option, might it be combined type of theory? "leaving epistemological issues aside and by focusing on ontology" (Wiener, 2006)

I also bit confused whether empirical research relates to ontology, while normative research relates to epistemology.

Hello,

Could anybody kindly deliberate the following questions:

1. Does constructivism relate to ontological or epistemological theorizing? Might it be combined?

"leaving epistemological issues aside and by focusing on ontology" (Wiener, 2006)

2. Are empirical research relates to ontology, while normative research relates to epistemology?

Grateful in advance!)

My topic is: The effect of augmented reality based- teaching material in enhancing students' academic achievement and creative thinking skills among primary student.

In this study, I m attempting to design AR booklet for the experimental group through using the five phases of ADDIE model. I have been told that in order to adopt this model there must be a need to inject my 3 research theories (constructivism- Guilford theory - situated learning theory) into the model.

My questions:

1- Do you think these selected theories are best fit into my 3 variables under investigation?

2- If so, how to inject these theories into ADDIE model?

Thanks in advance

It happens that one must judge research papers that differ significantly from one's paradigmatic stance. This happens a lot between qualitative and quantitative. Such paradigmatic differences are cause for much dismay, mostly for qualitative researchers who are judged by "qualitatively-uneducated" peers.

However, there are time when a qualitative researcher must referee a qualitative paper written (clearly) by a quantitative (i.e., positivist or post-positivist) researcher. What do you do as a reviewer of qualitative research papers when you hold a constructivist/critical/relativist/interpretativist paradigmatic stance and in the papre you are reviewing:

a. The authors use random sampling?

b. The authors try to generalize from their findings?

c. They present means and SDs to describe their participants?

d. They do not employ any reflexive methods?

e. They claim to refute previous findings?

f. They fail to consider alternative interpretations?

G. They build a theory using only Thematic Analysis?

Basically, I am wondering how one may judge a paper from a paradigmatic stance other than their own?

I have noticed that in the literature , they used constructivism theory and social constructivism theory interchangeably .. They meant the social constructivism .. What do you think ?

They sometimes use Piaget’s Constructivism to represent the constructivism theory and Vygotsky’s Constructivism to represent the social constructivism theory.

Do you think that when they mention Vygotsky theory when explaining Constructivism theory they are basically meant the social constructivism as I really got confused.

For my dissertation work, I have been studying Constructivism, Critical Theory, and Computers.

I am curious what people think about this premise:

There is no single software program to use in the learning process, rather it will be that students will program their own software as part of their learning process.

-----

Do you see this potential in all areas of school K-20? Or do you see it limited to particular slices?

Thanks for thinking about this! -- Bryan

The reason, I am writing to you is because I am working on my dissertation and I chosen qualitative case study with constructivism as theoretical framework. Thank you in advance!

Should need to know more about my research purpose, feel free to contact me I will be more than happy to share it with you!

Sincerely,

Theo,

We often see positivism and constructivisim as opposed paradigme in conducting research study. I know that quantitative studies are the best data collection method we can use in a positive paradigme. That this mean that qualtitative methods are related to constructivism (or phenomenology). What are typical methods used in constructivism paradigmes. Thank you all for your feedbacks

Do you think that the ES of IR is still influential as compared to constructivism in explaining contemporary relations of states?

Savickas, in "The theory and practice of career construction" affirmed that he uses social constructionism as a metatheory in his career construction theory and afterwards said that is important to view career in a contextualist and constructionist perspective. My doubt is: what is the epistemologic base of Savickas' career construction theory?

Creswell (2008) and Peterson & Gencel (2013) illustrates four worldviews; post-positivism, constructivism, advocacy/participatory, and Pragmatism while (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015) presents positivism, critical realism, Interpretivism, postmodernism, and pragmatism.

Any particular reason on their differences? Whom do we follow? Your insight would be highly appreciated.

Thank you in Advance.

References

Creswell, J. (2008). Three components involved in a research design. In: the Selection of a Research Design, 5-11. Retrieved from https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/27395_Pages5_11.pdf

Peterson, K. & Gencel, C. (2013). Worldviews, research methods, and their relationship to validity in empirical software engineering research. 2013 Joint Conference of the 23rd International Workshop on Software Measurement and the 8th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement. doi:10.1109/IWSM-Mensura.2013.22

Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2015). Research methods for business students (7th ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education Unlimited.

Hi I need help for my thesis.

My thesis is about teaching fraction concepts for primary pupils and I struggling to identify the appropriate constructivism learning approach.

The definition of following expressions based on learning theories such as behaviorism or Constructivism or etc. are requested with credit references.

Your comments are highly regarded.

I am writing a book on Paradigms in Quality Management. I now have discovered four:

 1. The paradigm of Empirics (to measure is to know)

2. The Paradigm of Reflection (if you measure, you still know nothing: have a discussion)

3. The Paradigm of Reference (measure and compare to a standard/model)

4. The Paradigm of Pragmatism (there is no right or wrong, quality is dependent on time, place, context)

Anyone, any thoughts on this?

Is knowledge related to our being in the world (earth)?

Would we have discovered the phenomenon of gravity?

Hi, after my literature research, I find that there is little concrete application or explanation of different epistemologies.

Since the most traditional view on semi-structured interview is about constructivism, I would like to ask

1) Do constructivists generate definition for their research question? Or do they just leave it open-ended for the interviewees?

2) What is role of interviewer in semi-structured interview, according to constructivism?

3) What is a good semi-structured interview according to constructivism? How do they evaluate dynamic interaction of interviewees and interviewers? How do constructivists evaluate the influence of researchers on interviewees?

4) Is it possible to evaluate semi-structured interview from the point of view of positivism or critical realism? If no, why? If yes, how is that possible?

Im sorry that there are a lot questions, but I do really want to know more about qualitative research. If possible, I would love to read some literature suggested by you guys. Thanks a lot!

Anna

1) What is the difference between constructivism, critical realism and phenomenology?

2) I know there can few types of constructivism, but do they differ quite a lot actually?

3) If I am to conduct a qualitative research on environmentally friendly behaviour, what epistemology would you suggest?

Thanks!

Anna

If blended learning aimed at enhancing language development, so which of theses learning theories are more relevant ?

Thank you

As an epistemological stance

Naturalism and positivism. Thank you very much

I read an article about proposing an operational definition of teachers' beliefs. It was written that this definition can be adopted in semi-structured interviews without other instruction. And I tried to find some information about how to used operational definitions in semi-structured interview. Well, unlucky, I haven't found any information  can solve my puzzle. Please help me with understanding that, or if you happened to have an article about this, could you share it with me? Thank you.

Grounded theory as developed by Anselm Strauss is rooted in information received from ordinary citizens which it is argued provides useful insights into issues in societies. This perspective is also supported by the Brazilian educator and sociologist Paulo Friere, Karl Polanyi and the Interpretivist approaches of Max Webers Social Action Theory, Husserl's Phenomenology and Schultz' Ethnomethodological Perspective. I would not mind contributing an article/chapter for the proposed book.  

Can somebody help on how best I can use thematic analysis for data analysis. Will be happy with some literature in this area. Please help!

Hi everyone, I'm currently writing my research paper. As part of my research, I developed a framework for schools to transfer values synchronously. However, I have my doubts as to whether the framework I developed should be called a framework or model. Could somebody advise me on this? I have attached the model in this question. 

Dear colleagues,

I am looking for sound theoretical underpinnings or even empirical studies on the advantages (and disadvantages) of researching questions related to the teaching-learning process in a (controlled) field study rather than in an experimental design. The underlying idea is that for the sake of a clean-cut research design in teaching-learning research it often seems more appropriate to conduct experiments, where all variables exept for the one under survey are held constant (for example when you want to demonstrate the value added of a new instructional arrangement vs. a more traditional teaching method etc.). However, sometimes it is simply more practicable to research these questions in a naturalistic setting, i. e. you conduct a field study where you try as best as you can to hold constant whatever intervening variables might occur.

I was wondering, if there is some literature arguing for (controlled) field studies as a reliable research approach in teaching-learning research? The references should contain something more than the practicability argument (which from a methodological standpoint is a very weak one). Also hints for studies which used a field experiment/field study approach in a methodologically sound way are very welcome!

Difference between theoretical underpinnings and philosophical underpinnings of a methodology ? 

Your thesis reminds me of erly research I did at the University of Wisconsin with game theory and its relation with concept development in primary classrooms. It also hearkens to Wittgenstein's theories of language and philosophy in the Tractatus.

My thesis explores residential care for older people in a country other than my own  western country. I am drawn to pragmatism because I will be asking 'what' and 'how' questions and it is notable that Indian dialectical philosophy; the Sanskrit concept of anekàntavada corresponds with western dialectical pragmatism in that both views hold there is no singular reality (ekànta) (Schang, 2010).

This far, the majority of my reading  links pragmatism to mixed methods designs (qual/quant). Is there a reason why this paradigm is not linked with qualitative designs?

Pragmatic researchers ask ‘what’ and ‘how’ questions by selecting a variety of data collection methods which are capable of answering different research questions (Creswell, 2014, Murphy et al, 1990). For them, situations nor indeed entities cannot be divorced from context which means that investigations and explorations are embedded within the socio-economic-political and historical contexts (Ball, 1979, Creswell, 2014). For pragmatists, ‘truth’ is a relativistic concept which changes unpredictably from place to place and time to time, dependent on ‘the situation, the context, the issue…’ (Johnson & Gray, 2015). Although pragmatists are not constrained by singular paradigms, the epistemological and ontological inferences within pragmatism imply that deliberate actions have consequences which create situations (Cherryholmes, 1994, Creswell, 2011, 2014). Being unencumbered by abstract thought on the nature of ‘reality’ a pragmatist researcher looks to examine what is really going on within social processes of the concrete world and offers readers ‘descriptions, theories, explanations and narratives’ (Cherryholmes, 1992:13).

Dr. Jackline Elliot

Can anyone tell what is the difference between triangulation, mix-method and multi-method research?

I want to find out if GTM can be incorporated in the conventional teaching case method?

I am doing a qualitative case study. I have made a theoretical model from the literature review and now it seems reasonable to apply a deductive approach for a coding system. However, I find that case studies usually employ inductive approach. Can I use a deductive one?

Also, could anyone share any link with the explanations whether a case study has to be longitudinal (min 12 weeks). Can it be shorter since I hope it will be enough to answer the main research question?

The difference between Thematic and narrative analysis, advantages and disadvantages?

for my research work I have to find out theoretical rationality to develop the concept of 'Spiritual Ecology'. Could you please help me to find out better sources for that? 

I am researching the cognitive complexity of PhD students at each year of the process, and am favouring a specific profile tool, but for robustness, it would be useful to run the students through a second test such as an SJT to determine how they think about themselves in a more traditional psychological test. 

I will be including elements of SJT's in my research, so if I can have students go through them from the start, it adds at least two chapters to my thesis!

Many thanks.