Science topic

Constructivism - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Constructivism, and find Constructivism experts.
Questions related to Constructivism
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
60 answers
  • In my opinion, the location of knowledge in the head or in the brain is a postulate, that is to postulate means "to suggest or accept that to theory or idea is true as a starting point for reasoning or discussion" (Collins). But Basis for Research. To postulate is "to assume to be very or exist; Take for Granted ”(Collins). And I would add to take for granted without any proof, and in any case not demonstrable .
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).
Relevant answer
Answer
As a rule, scientists are in the learning mode all their lives (however, there are also those who hold tightly to the knowledge gained in their youth). Learning and research are closely linked. Of course, the sense organs play an important role in any activity, including scientific. But how then to explain the phenomenon of Pontryagin (1908-1988), who lost his eyes at the age of 14 and became one of the most significant mathematicians of the 20th century? There was also Hawking, who didn’t have much at all ... I knew blind, deaf, legless and armless (the consequences of what is called “WWII” in the West, but not only) scientists. They were not much different from scientists (mostly only in everyday life), who had a "complete set" of the body. But I did not know a single person who was able to learn and did not have a head. However, sometimes professors are called headless quite complete children ... What about the practice of teaching deaf-blind-mute children (E. Keller, I. A. Sokolyansky, L. S. Vygotsky ...)? Does the author of the question confuse the processing of information and the channels for obtaining it? Not so long ago, I personally made sure that we see not what our eyes show us, it's a long story, the "visible picture" has changed a lot for me. But the world has remained almost the same! Neither I myself (however, this is not a criterion, fools never realize themselves as fools), nor those around me (maybe they don’t want to upset me?), did not notice changes in my ability of learning.
A distant relative of mine, a long time ago, fell and badly injured his head. Medics performed an surgery, removing a large hematoma from his skull. After that, he saw the world ... reversed and on a different scale for his left and right eyes. The scale then changed sequentially and continuously until it leveled off, and the "reversal" continued for about a year, and then visible picture suddenly returned to "normal". But all this time he continued to work on the book (he was a doctor of technical sciences) and in laboratory. He said that he quickly adapted to the inverted and distorted picture, he even read and wrote ... Those parts of his book that he wrote at that time were no smarter or dumber than the rest of the text. Maybe he used his brain...
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
I believe the fundamentals of Research and Evaluation should be taught in senior secondary schools. These students already engage in Research without actually knowing. Mostly, I give students topics and concepts to find out more about; they browse or ask people who are more informed so as to have a clearer understanding: That is Research.
For Evaluation, these students are supposed to have knowledge of how they're rated and implications of low ratings. More importantly they should be taught to read their graded scripts, understand the teacher's comments and take corrections as feedback for an improved Learning outcome.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Ms. Hunt!
You raised a very important issue to consider. May I argue that research is a "collective platform" for working with science while evaluation (measuring) is a toolset to advance science and education. I searched for resources to support my claim:
1) Valle, N., Brishke, J., Shenkman, E. et al. Design, Development and Evaluation of the Citizen Science Cancer Curriculum (CSCC): a Design and Development Case Study. TechTrends (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00737-6, Open access:
2) Blankenberger, B., Gehlhausen Anderson, S. & Lichtenberger, E. Improving Institutional Evaluation Methods: Comparing Three Evaluations Using PSM, Exact and Coarsened Exact Matching. Res High Educ 62, 1248–1275 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-021-09632-0, Open access:
3) Álex Escolà-Gascón, Josep Gallifa, How to measure soft skills in the educational context: psychometric properties of the SKILLS-in-ONE questionnaire, Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 74, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101155. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191491X22000323
4) Daraio, C., Vaccari, A. How should evaluation be? Is a good evaluation of research also just? Towards the implementation of good evaluation. Scientometrics (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04329-2, Open access:
Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
I think this is about applying various art forms in a constructivist way.
Relevant answer
Answer
I think that an existing theory of aesthetic construction is the theory of art education based on cognitive domains (DBAE) because it includes the component of aesthetics.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
Using self-identification to measure indigenous identity faces distinct challenges globally as indigenous identity is considered fluid and multidimensional. While self-identification should remain the central criterion and countries should extend it to their other instruments, further analyses to understand ethnic disparities should consider indigenous identity's multidimensional.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
9 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
While social constructionism focuses on the objects produced by a group's social interactions, social constructivism focuses on an individual's learning as a result of his or her interactions in a group.
The major distinction between the two theories is the emphasis that each places on experiences and social interactions. The emphasis in constructivism is on personal experiences in creating knowledge, but in social constructivism the emphasis is on social interactions and culture.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
9 answers
Constructivist Research Approach
  • Constructivist approaches refer to an epistemological position in which knowledge is regarded as constructed. [Source: sciencedirect]
  • Constructivism accepts reality as a construct of human mind, therefore reality is perceived to be subjective. Moreover, this philosophical approach is closely associated with pragmatism and relativism. Constructivism philosophy is based on cognitive psychology. [Source: research-methodology]
  • In social constructivism, human interests are important for research purposes and knowledge is constructed through social interaction. Such knowledge is shared rather than an individual experience. According to constructivists, the reality is a subjective creation. There is no single reality. [Source: intgrty]
  • Constructivist Grounded Theory (CGT) is a research method that focuses on generating new theories through inductive analysis of the data gathered from participants rather than from pre-existing theoretical frameworks. In this qualitative research approach, the researcher seeks to understand a social phenomenon and construct theories through participants’ experiences, using iterative data collection and analysis. [Source: delvetool]
  • The Constructivist approach involves constructing hypotheses and theories from emerging data. Social scientists often apply CGT to understand and explore social processes and construct theories where no previous theories exist. [Source: delvetool]
Positivist Research Approach
  • Positivists prefer quantitative methods such as social surveys, structured questionnaires and official statistics because these have good reliability and representativeness. Positivists see society as shaping the individual and believe that ‘social facts’ shape individual action. [Source: revisesociology]
  • Positivism adheres to the view that only “factual” knowledge gained through observation (the senses), including measurement, is trustworthy. [Source: research-methodology]
  • Positivism refers to an evidence-based reality that can be mathematically interpreted. [Source: reprac]
  • Positivist philosophical approach is most closely associated with the observations and experiments, used for collection of numerical data. [Source: intechopen]
  • The positivist believed in empiricism – the idea that observation and measurement was the core of the scientific endeavor. [Source: conjointly]
  • Positivist approach to ensure the richness of information in quantitative results. [Source: ajap]
Relevant answer
Answer
I am not sure what kinds of comments you want, but I do disagree with your assertion that constructivism is similar to BOTH relativism and pragmatism. This claim makes it sound as if there should be some kind of indirect connection between relativism and pragmatism, but that is certainly not the case.
With regard to relativism, the key issue is whether you can maintain that individuals construct their own reality without somehow reaching the conclusion that everyone has their own unique reality, which is the heart of relativism.
With regard to pragmatism, the key issue is that pragmatists disengage from issues related to both ontology and epistemology. Instead of arguing about whether reality is objective or subjective, pragmatists are concerned with the consequences of acting one way or another.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Constructivism is a theory describing how learning regardless of whether learners are using their experiences to understand a lecture, it build critical thinking and PBL is a learning environment that embodies most of the principle that improve learning active, cooperative, getting feedback, tailored to student learning and to solve problems, both increase critical thinking in learning.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
You may refer to references about critical pragmatics and critical discourse analysis to help you answer the question.
Relevant answer
Answer
A good researcher can diagnose the practical aspects of data through statistical applications, but the problem is that some researchers are weak in statistical skills.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Completamente de acuerdo con el profesor Huí Cai
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
12 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Yu Tang
"How to Cultivate the habit of reading in early childhood with constructivism paradigm?"-- you ask.
As as she it, the habit of reading in early childhood can be framed in two constructivist models or paradigms: Jean Piaget's contructivist theory of cognitive dvelopment and Lev Vygotsky's constructivist social-cultural theory. Both psychologist emphasize the role of children's actions in any type of development, be it cognitive or linguistic. So, the best way to develop children's habit of reading is to offer them books with images related with some words such that they themselves read such books. From a constructist framework. children do not develop their habits to read from listening to readers; they must be readers themselves. The is what is called leaning by doing
I hope this helps you. Good luck for your work.
All the best, Orlando M, Lourenço
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
13 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Agree with Muhammad Amjad what aspects of seperation anxiety also are you examining this will determine the research methodology employed.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
21 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
As I think the constructionist research paradigm is suitable for the study of early childhood education.......................
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
You are most welcome Wei Li!
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
4 answers
At the end of The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat, Oliver Sacks cites a number of influential writers who have shaped the direction of his own thinking about neurology; what he refers to as his ‘essential axis of neurology’. As participants within domains of our chosen interest, we are all influenced by the work of previous and/or prominent proponents of the field.
Within education I have been influenced by a number of fields of interest i.e., gifted and talented (Renzulli, Gagne), cognitive psychology (Piaget, Bruner, Paivio), experiential learning (Kolb), disposition and the affective domain (Krathwohl), active agency and learner participation (Dewey), to name a few. Probably the most influential have been those writers who have spelt out the developmental mechanism of learning referred to as construction or constructivism, and the role of action and participatory agency in learning (of course not to reduce learning only to action and agency on the part of the learner!). This influence has been of great use in engaging learners in the classroom.
What would your essential axis of learning be, relative to education, learning and teaching?
And how have these influences shaped your thinking as an education specialist?
Relevant answer
Answer
Very philosophical question. My philosophy shapes my practice and this has changed phenomenally over the years due to research and the varying context with in my teaching sphere. I have had to change my dispositions and attitudes towards my students, to become a bit more amenable and understanding especially within the Covid context. My methodology has evolved and now includes engagement, interactivity and more contemporary methods suited to andragogy. Great question Adrian Twissell
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
In the study, the main skills are lexical resources, grammatical range and accuracy, connection and consistency, etc
Relevant answer
Answer
Paradigms provide a holistic view that guides our research. It depends upon the perception of the researcher about how he prefers to view the reality (ontology), the nature of the knowledge that is to be gained (epistemology) and the systematic methods to be used to acquire that knowledge (methodology).
A positivist thinks that the truth out there is only one and it can be observed and studied (typical quantitative research). A post-positivist still think that there is only one truth, but it can never be completely observed. Therefore, it allows flexible methodological options to allow more interaction between the researcher and subjects through approaches such as survey research, observation, interviews, etc. (a mixed-method approach). On the other hand, a constructivist thinks that social interactions within a community, between people, and the environment are vital to acquire the knowledge that they are looking for and hence utilizes pure qualitative research approaches.
Now, the big question about which one to choose. It depends upon the research question, the nature of knowledge that you are looking for, and the characteristics of the participants that you are going to deal with.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
In my oppion,it based on your research purpose to choose which paradigm and research method applied in your research project.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
24 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Both form and function are important in order to be a proficient user of the language. However, I would say that the first goal for learners is to communicate. For that purpose, teachers must put students in scenarios where they really need to communicate in the target language, this is, use the language with a clear purpose. Teachers must provide the necessary vocabulary and structures to achieve the communicative goal. So function comes first, then accuracy and form come afterwards.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi,
In constructivism, you will see the visible part/empirical findings of the iceberg - if we assume your phenomenon as an iceberg. In other words, you will be limited with the visible part of the iceberg. Well, what about the other/invisible part of the iceberg? At this point, critical realism will help you to see the other part, that is, the real level where the causal/generative mechanism is in. This requires a more comprehensive or deep contextual knowledge for your study.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
هناك الكثير من الاستراتيجيات والنماذج والطرق التدريسية الحديثة التي يمكن ان يستخدمها المعلم مثل استراتيجيات حل المشكلات استراتيجيات التفكير او العصف الذهني وغيرها كلها تتمركز حول المتعلم وتجعل من المتعلم محور العملية التعليمية
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
3 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi. I do want to give you a recommendation in order to help you to illuminate the basic theory of situated learning that also relate with contstructivism. Have you ever read about theory from John Dewey?
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
The aim of your research is to develop the framework and you will use the process of doing mixed-methods. If you will phenomenological approach, you have to consider research questions as well. At the same time, if you will use phenomenological study, Ontology, and epistemology should be conducted through the process of data collection and analysis. For example, a descriptive phenomenological study, you have to suspend prior knowledge, belief, and preconceived ideas during data collection and analysis. Is it an appropriate method for your study? Or it should be only content analysis or thematic analysis before developing questionnaires in Quantitative research (Mixed-method as QUAL+ QUANT). I suggest you read a book which was written by John W. Creswell about mixed-method.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
2 answers
In science class room constructivist approach is useful
Relevant answer
Answer
Aaaw, thanks so much. You saved me . I was actually stressed looking for information on this
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
10 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
What we are discussing comes under the concept of Worldview. Worldviews are essentially contain an Ontology, an Epistemology and an Axiology.
We each have our own Worldview, which is learnt from childhood - and is socially constructed. A Worldview which contains the idea that it is not socially constructed seems quite strange to me, and is basically unimaginable within my own constructed Worldview.
Worldview is an idea developed from Kant (Weltanschuaang). If you are interested in this concept, have a look at Sire's "The Universe Next Door" and "The Elephant in the Room". Both books give about eight or nine questions to start to identify the important elements of a specific Worldview. Look as well at Naugle's Worldview: The History of a Concept.
In a Worldview context, the categories (for wont of a better word) are intertwined. As Martin Böhnert says, it is difficult and complex.
So, Sire says the first two questions are Epistemological (how do we now) and Ontological (what exists in our world) - but not necessarily in that order.
A religious Worldview is based on the existence of God/gods (or some sort of spiritual beings and realm). So Ontological is the first question. Descartes starts from this perspective and answers the Epistemological question How do we know? by saying 'God made me a knowing being'. So the Epistemology is intertwined with the Ontology.
Clearly, within most religious Worldviews the Axiology is handed out by the creator/divine beings, so the Axiology is intertwined within the Worldview with the Ontology and Epistemology.
Atheistic Worldviews (sometimes called Nihilistic) starts with the Epistemological question How do we know? Ontology is the second question. And without a God or Gods to point to, the Epistemological question is difficult to answer, and the discussion quickly reaches radical scepticism - i.e., the links between any real world and our conceptions of such a world cannot be made ... (So when people say I am wrong - it is largely because we do not share the same Worldview - but that is a very high level excuse and I rarely make it in any academic forum).
Reid says "I would argue that constructivism is a paradigm which affords particular ontological and epistemological beliefs. "
Exactly - Constructivism itself has a Worldview - but do not confuse 'paradigm' with 'Worldview'.
So Leyli, my basic answers to your questions " whether constructivism relates to ontological or epistemological theorizing? As an option, might it be combined type of theory?"
Yes - the combined theory is around, and found in, Worldviews, and there are three works I mentioned above that do exactly that.
"leaving epistemological issues aside and by focusing on ontology"
This probably cannot be done. Epistemologies and Ontologies are intertwined. They are reliant on each other for their coherency (or lack of coherency).
The only reason I say 'probably' is that I am unfamiliar with Wiener's work - but I might be able to mount an argument from Phenomenology (Heidegger rather than Husserl) to make such a statement, and I would move into its child Existentialism, probably the work of Merleau-Ponty or maybe Jaspers.
American Pragmatism would also be a starting point to ignore Epistemological issues, but to do so always ends in radical scepticism. I think the main reason people ignore Epistemology is because, without a God, there is no definitive answer - only debate and discussion.
The other reason to ignore Epistemology (except for philosophers) is that such questions tell us very little about the word we live in.
"I also bit confused whether empirical research relates to ontology, while normative research relates to epistemology."
I'm not surprised. I find the distinctions between them to be artificial. 'Empirical research' claims of objectivity and investigating any real world are false. Like 'Normative research', empirical research is also based on a point of view - based in a Worldview. Empirical science has its own Worldview.
Statistical research is conducted within a Worldview - a view that says they things we are counting are real things that are different from other real things. But it is our socially constructed Worldview, specifically the Ontology, that makes those distinctions. Other, equally valid, other groups of 'real things' can be easily made and counted.
I live and work across cultures, and between Worldviews. The things that exist in one Worldview/Ontology do not exist in the other Worldview/Ontology (such as Demons, Angels, Souls - these are the most obvious examples of things that may not exist within the Worldviews of the people reading this).
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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!)
Relevant answer
Answer
RE: Does constructivism relate to ontological or epistemological theorizing? Might it be combined?
Constructivism is a position on the ontological status of objects (broadly construed); it claims that certain objects don’t exist indepenently of minds but are invented rather than discovered. A related possible epistemological view might be that we don’t have directly access to reality but only to constructions, so our knowledge of constructions in some sense.
RE: Does empirical research relate to ontology, while normative research relates to epistemology?
No. Empirical research can relate to both. In fact empiricism is the view that the foundation of our knowledge is sensory experience, but it can either regard such experience as evidence for independently existing objects or not, either of which would be to combine empiricism with an ontological view. Early Logical Positivism (a.k.a. Logical Empiricism) tended to regard an ontology of independently existing objects as undesirable metaphysics in that they identified cognitively meaningful statements about the world with their conditions of verification (e.g. observations).
Normative research can involve ontology as well as epistemology. Moral realists might claim that values aren’t entirely mind-dependent, which is an ontological position. How we can know what the moral truths is a key epistemology problem.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
3 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
thank you so much for your comments
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
Depends on the pragmatic stance. Mine is trying to find out whether the work and results could be of any use to somebody, not mandatory me. I am looking for a message and an audience for it. If I can't find it, I, most probably, reject the paper or ask for a major revision. After all, publishing is, or at least should be, a communication process.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
You need to know that constructivism is divided into cognitive constructivism and social constructivism. The main proponent of Cognitive constructivism is Jean Piaget while the main proponent of social constructivism is Lev Vygotsky.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
So glad that what I wrote seems to have made sense to you. I see we are somewhat at similar lines. I do not yet think we have seen any final outcome of the use of digital ICTs. The next big, and somewhat quite disruptive thing I expect is development in the direction of learning analytics and adaptive learning. This will begin to respect that learners need different time and other different resources and relations to learn. Instead of time being the constant and learning variable, learning can be constant and time variable. But this destroys school scheduling and organisation and calls for reconstruction of social learning structures in organised education.
I leave a couple of attachments here to papers on RG, by Floridi, that I think you will like, related to my previous post - and a conference presentation of mine.
You write about constructivism - but I wonder if you are in your thinking closer to constructionism. Papert was a friend of Piaget (constructivist) but became in the end a constructionist. A lot of difference here. Floridi sees it as the difference between knowledge of the user and knowledge of the maker, and blames the knowledge of the user, knowledge as a spectator sport, on Plato. Floridi sees it as a historic mistake - it is the maker of artefacts (which Plato despised) who has deeper knowledge - he or she knows how it works, can take the artefact apart, explain and put it together again. Think of the difference between a car user and a car mechanic. Artefacts can also be non-physical of course. See attached paper ”What the makers knowledge could be”, and ”In defence of constructionism”. I will also send you on RG mail a short text behind a paywall.
However, if you are doing a dissertation under surveillance, deviations from the almost all-dominant constructivism dogma may not be problem-free. Just a heads-up...
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
3 answers
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,
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Theo,
I am completing my dissertation -- waiting to defend. I did a quantitative study and used constructivism as it relates to the grading of reflective journal writing and student honesty; I learned that constructivism is a scaffolding process where students add to or build on their knowledge; the professor/instructor stands back and allows students to learn. There is no shortage of articles related to constructivism. All the best. Jo Anne
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
16 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
The poles of positivism and constructivism do not exhaust the possibilities as I argue in this
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
9 answers
Do you think that the ES of IR is still influential as compared to constructivism in explaining contemporary relations of states?
Relevant answer
Answer
In recent years, constructivism seems to be more influential, especially regarding issues related to cultural identity. Keeping this in mind and taking consideration that contemporary threats, such as interstate conflicts and terrorism have a strong association with identities, constructivism is able to give adequate answers. However, we should try to combine different disciplines in order to deliberate on complicated issues that exist in modern times. Those different and competing disciplines focus on different levels of analysis and as a result, give different answers as causes of contemporary issues. Hence, if someone wishes to be prudent, he has to research on different levels of analysis and on a flourish of actors. So, he has to understand multiple theories.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
3 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
It seems highly probable that Peter Berger’s Social Construction of Reality is the basis for his argument.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
8 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
You can find lots of such lists. This project of listing "paradigms" gained its popularity through the work of Egon Guba and Yvonne Lincoln. Their first list, in their book Naturalistic Inquiry, included Positivism, Post-Positivism, and Constructivism. Later, in chapters for the various editions of the Denzin and Lincoln Handbook of Qualitative Research, they expanded their list to include Critical Theory and Participatory Research -- but they later dropped Participatory Research from their list, showing that there is room for flexibility in creating a list. The introduction of Pragmatism to such lists began with its popularity in the field of mixed methods research, where there is also an interest in Critical Realism. So, a lot of the divergences arise from different traditions and various fields.
It is also worth noting that Guba & Lincoln were responsible for introducing the philosophy of knowledge framework (ontology, epistemology, and methodology) as the way to define their version of paradigms. But this way of distinguishing paradigms has nothing to do with the work of Thomas Kuhn -- it was entirely invented by Guba and Lincoln.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
16 answers
xd
Relevant answer
Answer
I agree with Greg, try Bandura's Social Learning Theory. Bandura found that people learn from each other by observation, imitation, and modeling.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
12 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Nanteni,
There may be many different approaches to bring-out with the students' existing concepts on fractions. For example, the teacher may ask about students' experience of having pizza at home. It is usually delivered into pieces. Teachers may ask the students about how many pieces were there when they ate some. Other relevant questions may be about how many pieces one student had, how many other persons were there and so on. The teacher then may summarize with the concept of fraction and, finally, introduce the fraction characteristics and operational laws to the students and something new to learn.
All the best to your thesis.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
The definition of following expressions based on learning theories such as behaviorism or Constructivism or etc. are requested with credit references.
  1. learning;
  2. mathematics learning;
  3. teaching and learning or learning and teaching;
  4. mathematics learning and teaching process;
  5. mathematics learning and teaching situation;
  6. mathematics learning and teaching position; and
  7. mathematics learning and teaching strategies.
Your comments are highly regarded.
Relevant answer
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks Zuhair. Your contribution seems to fit in the empiric paradigm, where measuring e.g. using indicators is paramount?
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
21 answers
Hi, as far as I understand there are some differences between “social constructivism” and “social constructionism”, but I keep coming across references to one OR the other in the same kinds of discussions. In the case of Bryman’s “Social Research Methods”, the glossary contains “constructivism” with a note to “see constructionism”, but without explanation, which seems to imply there is no difference. Please can anyone clarify?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi!
Good question! I agree with you, many authors do seemingly not care about any difference. Perhaps they don't even notice the different spelling of the terms. Should not surprise me. And Berger and Luckmann's known book about constructivism has "construction" in its title. (The social construction of reality). Confusing as well.
And yes, then we also have constructivism and constructionism on their own as basically epistemological or learning theories about the individual's possibility of knowledge; but when we place "social" before any of them we have an emphasis on sociological theories, how we together can make social sense of the world around us (if any).
Wikipedia makes this difference (right now today) "While social constructionism focuses on the artifacts that are created through the social interactions of a group, social constructivism focuses on an individual's learning that takes place because of his or her interactions in a group."
But there are different thinkers behind the terms. Constructionism is theorized and advocated by Piaget and Papert. It is as I understand it to make models, constructions together and thereby construct knowledge artifacts (which can be material as well, but not necessarily). What you know, you should be able to take apart, tinker with, explain and put together again in the same way or another way. Luciano Floridi has a very interesting paper where he seems to almost despise constructivism as "the user's knowledge" while "constructionism" is "the maker's knowledge". In the history of philosophy he blames this unfortunate wrong emphasis on Plato, who seemed to despise people who constructed things, the makers, and prioritized those who reflected over things, the users. He seems to mean that constructivism is this "user's knowledge" that does not take human "poiesis", creative construction ability, into account but instead looks at the world more unengaged and reflective from a distance. Furthermore, this disengaged kind of knowledge also claims priority.
Constructivists surely would not agree, but I find Floridi very interesting.
Check up his other paper attached here about the difference between the knowledge of a) Alice that causes a change to a system in the world, B) Bob who watches Alice when doing this change, and c) Carol, who is being told that a change to the system in the world has occured.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
16 answers
Is knowledge related to our being in the world (earth)?
Would we have discovered the phenomenon of gravity?
Relevant answer
Answer
Domenico,
There is no question about this. Human life is certainly possible in weightless conditions. Many hundreds of humans have lived and worked in these conditions over the last 50 years.
Gravity would still be an identifiable phenomenon - indeed, in a microgravity environment experiments such as the Cavendish experiment would be even easier to perform!
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
In general, epistemological issues are not closely connected to the application of specific methods for collecting and analyzing data, and this its one of the reasons that the emphasis on epistemological issues has decreased since its highpoint in the 1990s.
Since it sounds like you already have a research question, then the real issue is whether qualitative interviewing will help you answer that question, and if so, what kind of qualitative interviewing should you choose?
The book I recommend on qualitative interviewing in general is:
Runbin & Rubin, Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data, from Sage.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
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
Relevant answer
Answer
You don't need any philosophical assumptions to choose a research topic and the questions to ask about that topic.
As far as "worldview" goes, this term is often a synonym for paradigm, where the common citations would be to the work of Egon Guba and Yvonne Lincoln. Guba and Lincoln primarily contrasted constructivism (which is similar to interpretivism) with post-positivism.
This approach was popular in the U.S. back in the 1990s, but it has since fallen out of favor here because it has little to do with how one actually collects and analyzes data. For instance, there is no philosophical linkage one way or the other to collecting semi-structured interviews. That is simply a qualitative method that is more appropriate for some research purposes and less appropriate for others.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
If blended learning aimed at enhancing language development, so which of theses learning theories are more relevant ?
Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Haba!
I see connectivism as a kind of constructivism - as also social constructivism is an emphasis under the broader label of constructivism. And do not forget constructionism, which is also highly interesting in relation to ICTs and learning, and something else.
However, I think all kinds of learning theories and connected pedagogies and didactics are in a way rather neutral to the use of both classrooms and ICTs and their possible combinations. Owning Ipads does not implicate constructivism, but Ipads can help design a course in a constructivism manner. You can do very oldfashioned or even evil or stupid teaching / learning designs with ICTs or without. ICTs instead broadens our possibilities to design teaching and affect student learning under varying circumstances of all kinds. No more magic than that (but highly important anyway).
If you only have your own oral voice (no books, paper, blackboard, Ipads, LMSs or other ICTs) and 50 students to teach under the shadow of a tree - you cannot do much adaption or variation to student needs, and the teaching /learning process is probably not very effective (it is hard to even give homework).
See this thought experiment:
and this interpretation of blended learning, focusing on time and process instead of technology or place:
which simplifies thinking of blended leanring versus learning theories.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
8 answers
As an epistemological stance
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Kamal Pokhrel,
Generally speaking, constructivism  refers to an epistemological stance explaining  that  humans generate knowledge and meaning based on the  interactions between their experiences and their ideas. Under such perspectivization,  while the world is independent of human minds,  knowledge of the world results from human and social construction. This theory is  attributed to Jean Piaget, who asserted that knowledge is internalized through articulated mechanisms involving two different but complementary processes ; namely , accommodation and assimilation. In general, humans construct new knowledge from their experiences.When individuals assimilate, they incorporate an already existing framework to internalize it, whereas  accommodation is the process of reframing and restructuring one's mental representations of the external world to fit new experiences.
 On the other hand, relational constructivism can be regarded as a relational consequence of the radical constructivism. Unlike social constructivism, it enlists certain epistemological lines of argument  for explaining how human experiences go over and beyond the limited conditions of human perception - that is , self- referentially operating cognitive mechanisms. Thus, it can be concluded that humans are incapable of making  objective conclusions about the realities of the  world , and as a result,  human constructions of reality is  not only subjective, but it also has a relational nature. In other words, , relational constructivism tends to focus on the relational conditions dominating  human perceptional processes.  According to Kraus (1969), relational constructivism  basically originates from an epistemological point of view which focuses on both social and material  relations whereby cognitive construction processes are accomplished  under certain relational conditions.
Best regards,
R. Biria
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
15 answers
Naturalism and positivism. Thank you very much
Relevant answer
Answer
Naturalism is one of those terms that has many senses. However, if one thinks of naturalism broadly as the attempt to explain the world in the manner of the natural sciences, i.e. without invoking anything supernatural, spiritual, or intentional, then one can distinguish various naturalist positions in terms of their ontological commitments. So construed, positivism (i.e. logical positivism or logical empiricism) can be regarded as a species of naturalism having the fewest ontological commitments (i.e. just the observations).
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
3 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
The term operational definition is almost entirely associated with quantitative research, where it describes how one measures ("operationalizes") something. The closest equivalent I can think of in qualitative research is to define eligibility criteria for determining who you will interview.
In semi-structured interviewing, the most important issue is often what a particular idea means to your participants, rather than what it means to you. When it is necessary to specify a definition for something you want them to discuss, then you simply do so.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
4 answers
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.  
Relevant answer
Answer
Russell, I apologise for the lateness of my response - for some reason, I did not get any notification about your question. I am afraid Grounded Theory has a history of application in the field of education and technology.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
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!
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear researcher,
The six steps prescribed by Braun and Clarke (2006) to carry out a thematic analysis are guidelines and should not be used as prescriptive, linear, and inflexible rules when analysing data. They should rather be used in relation to the research question and the available data. The six steps are as follows:
1. Familiarising yourself with your data
This step requires the researcher to be fully immersed and actively engaged in the data by firstly transcribing the interactions and then reading (and re-reading) the transcripts and/or listening to the recordings. Initial ideas should be noted down. It is important that the researcher has a comprehensive understanding of the content of the interaction and has familiarised him-/herself with all aspects of the data. This step provides the foundation for the subsequent analysis.
2. Generating initial codes
Once familiar with the data, the researcher must then start identifying preliminary codes, which are the features of the data that appear interesting and meaningful. These codes are more numerous and specific than themes, but provide an indication of the context of the conversation.
3.Searching for themes
The third step in the process is the start of the interpretive analysis of the collated codes. Relevant data extracts are sorted (combined or split) according to overarching themes. The researcher’s thought process should allude to the relationship between codes, subthemes, and themes.
4. Reviewing themes
A deeper review of identified themes follows where the researcher needs to question whether to combine, refine, separate, or discard initial themes. Data within themes should cohere together meaningfully, while there should be clear and identifiable distinctions between themes. This is usually done over two phases, where the themes need to be checked in relation to the coded extracts (phase 1), and then for the overall data set (phase 2). A thematic ‘map’ can be generated from this step.
5. Defining and naming themes
This step involves ‘refining and defining’ the themes and potential subthemes within the data. Ongoing analysis is required to further enhance the identified themes. The researcher needs to provide theme names and clear working definitions that capture the essence of each theme in a concise and punchy manner. At this point, a unified story of the data needs to emerge from the themes.
6. Producing the report
Finally, the researcher needs to transform his/her analysis into an interpretable piece of writing by using vivid and compelling extract examples that relate to the themes, research question, and literature. The report must relay the results of the analysis in a way that convinces the reader of the merit and validity of the analysis. It must go beyond a mere description of the themes and portray an analysis supported with empirical evidence that addresses the research question.
Her are some articles I hope they will help you:
Good luck
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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. 
Relevant answer
Answer
That is a framework. See the link below for the difference between a model and a framework. 
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
6 answers
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!
Relevant answer
Answer
Esteemed colleagues,
thank you very much for these answers, which have proven very helpfull allready. The references are of very good use, and it is also very interesting to see the different diciplinary perspective taken. Personally, I find it interesting that more open-minded writings/approaches to field studies as a valid research design seem to come from discipline other than the pedagogical-psychological sphere, which relates to different paradigms, I guess.
However, as mentioned in the answer by Samy Azer, the most crucial point for a valid field-study research desing still is how to compare your construct of interest in goups under the same condition(s). That, in my experience, is also the hardest part to realize, since in a naturalistic environment conditions are nealy never exactly the same, which makes the design always fragile....
Would love to read your comments on that!
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
19 answers
Difference between theoretical underpinnings and philosophical underpinnings of a methodology ? 
Relevant answer
Answer
If I understand you correctly, I think you are touching on something that I have always found confusing: Can you use the results from a GT study as the basis for a further GT study? With a strict interpretation of GT, you should have a minimum of preconceptions, which would mean avoiding formalized theory of any kind.
But if we can't use the theories from previous GT work to guide further GT work, that would definitely limit the extent to which we can accumulate knowledge via GT.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
8 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Continuing.....
Let us assume that game theory is a branch of mathematics and let us further assume that not all mathematics relies upon or even involves numbers.
A type of game that does not necessarily involve numbers is the NIM game where players employ strategic thinking to play.  The importance of strategic thinking in maths and game theory led me to mention Wittgenstein earlier. Of course Dr. Wittgenstein some might claim, thought of all language as game. That may be where psychology enters consideration. So we turn away towards Educational psychologists such as Piaget and/or Vygotsky. 
If we recall the history of curriculum development we can recall that Piaget's colleague Inhelder participated in the development of "New Math," that certainly featured much about language and game theory in its applications.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
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).
Relevant answer
Answer
Pragmatism became in the last three decades a cunning tag for whatever is supposed to be good to think in philosophy.  It is a tag given to a cloud, which is not recognised only because the English-speking world seem to have ignored and peacifully like to ignore other less palatable forms of such a universal recommended tag/container in history, and even in case this comfortable simplification of the array of forms of pragmatism were given a patch, the consequences of the remaining forms are either trivial or absurd, as I argued in various papers and books - with no refutation up to now. Thus the outcome ends up with just rhetoric advertising. I agree that QRD calls for an explicit philosophical frame, which however can't be a cloud of views, much the less advertising. So my answer to the question "Can pragmatism ...?"  is: no.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
4 answers
Dr. Jackline Elliot
Relevant answer
Answer
This question was rather directed to Dr. Jakline Elliot for her views. She is part of the project. 
Sorry!!
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
Can anyone tell what is the difference between triangulation, mix-method and multi-method research?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Pallavi Pandey,
Generally speaking, researchers may use either a deductive cycle or an inductive cycle for doing research. In the former, the researcher formulates a hypothesis and tries to see whether it is true or false. This type of research is confirmatory. In the Latter, however, the researcher aims to discover a certain generalization concerning a topic of interest. This makes the approach exploratory. In point of fact, the researcher starts with data collection, data analysis and ends with the generation of a hypothesis. More recently, hybridizing the two cycles has become a norm in doing research admixing the features of inductive and deductive cycles in one research. For more details, I refer you to a book titled "Research in Education" written by Best and Kahn (2006), which provides a wealth of appropriate information about the methods of research and data analysis.
Best regards,
R. Biria
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
5 answers
I want to find out if GTM can be incorporated in the conventional teaching case method?
Relevant answer
Answer
Conventional case method is quite different to GT. What is the advantage you are looking in using GT for teaching cases?
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
27 answers
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?
Relevant answer
Answer
Inductive or Deductive: Two Different Approaches
There are two “broad methods of reasoning: the inductive and deductive: Approaches. Induction is defining as moving from the specific to the general, while deduction begins with the general and ends with the specific; arguments based on experience or observation is best expressed inductively, while arguments based on laws, rules, or other widely accepted principles are best expressed deductively.  The deductive researcher “works from the ‘top down’, from a theory to hypotheses to data to add to or contradict the theory”: In contrast, they define the inductive researcher as someone who works from the “bottom-up, using the participants’ views to build broader themes and  generate a theory interconnecting the themes”.  In research, the two main types of analysis typically used are quantitative (deductive) and qualitative (inductive).  Though there seems to be some disagreement among researchers as to the best method to use when conducting research and gathering data, these two methods are not mutually exclusive and often address the same question using different methods
Inductive Approaches
In an inductive approach collect data, analyze patterns in the data, and then theorize from the data to research, a researcher begins by collecting data that is relevant to his or her topic of interest. Once a substantial amount of data has been collected, the researcher will then take a breather from data collection, stepping back to get a bird’s eye view of her data. At this stage, the researcher looks for patterns in the data, working to develop a theory that could explain those patterns. Thus, when researchers take an inductive approach, they start with a set of observations and then they move from those particular experiences to a more general set of propositions about those experiences. In other words, they move from data to theory, or from the specific to the general.
Deductive Approaches
Researchers taking a deductive approach develop hypotheses based on some theory or theories, collect data that can be used to test the hypotheses, and assess whether the data collected support the hypotheses. take the steps described earlier for inductive research and reverse their order. They start with a social theory that they find compelling and then test its implications with data. That is, they move from a more general level to a more specific one. A deductive approach to research is the one that people typically associate with scientific investigation. The researcher studies what others have done, reads existing theories of whatever phenomenon he or she is studying, and then tests hypotheses that emerge from those theories. While not all researchers follow a deductive approach, many do.
Complementary Approaches
While inductive and deductive approaches to research seem quite different, they can actually be rather complementary. In some cases, researchers will plan for their research to include multiple components, one inductive and the other deductive. In other cases, a researcher might begin a study with the plan to only conduct either inductive or deductive research, but then he or she discovers along the way that the other approach is needed to help illuminate findings. Here is an example of each such case.
Researchers may not always set out to employ both approaches in their work but sometimes find that their use of one approach leads them to the other.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
13 answers
The difference between Thematic and narrative analysis, advantages and disadvantages?
Relevant answer
Answer
My first thought is that if you want to do narrative analysis, then that process should start with the data collection itself. Specifically, you would want to do as much as possible to elicit high quality stories. Of course, it can be the case that your data produce an abidance of narrative material, even if that was not your original intent.
A second thing to consider is there are a number of different approaches to narrative analysis, whereas TA tends to be highly general in its application. So, you need to be clear about which version of narrative analysis you are using.
Finally, I don't thing that the two approaches are entirely incompatible, In particular, you could do a TA to cover the board aspects of the full data set, and then pick a particularly interesting part of those results to investigate in more depth with narrative analysis.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
8 answers
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? 
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Selim
Many thanks for your information - this will be very useful, especially the gap you mention on spiritual ecology and Daoism.
regards
David
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
2 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Darren!
I wonder whether you are acquainted with William Perry's (1970) book, Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. I think that you can profit a lot for your purposes from reading it . Generally speaking, the book presents a longitudinal study in a sample of college students (Harvard University). Perry was able to formulate 9, say, epistemological positions, which consist mainly of 4 positions (stages, levels): Dualism, Multiplicity, Relativism and Commitment. The book also presents a semi-clinical interview to assess those positions.  
What follows is a highly oversimplified outline. I urge you to read Perry's original book and article or any of the other literature referenced at the end of my answer.
William Perry claimed (and his claims have been substantiated by subsequent research) that college students (but others, too) "journey" through 9 "positions" with respect to intellectual and moral development. These stages can be characterized in terms of the student's attitude towards knowledge. The 9 positions, grouped into 4 categories, are:
1) Dualism/Received Knowledge: There are right/wrong answers, engraved on golden tablets in the sky, known to authorities. 
a) Basic Duality: All problems are solvable; therefore, the student's task is to learn the right solutions
b) Full Dualism: Some authorities (literature, philosophy) disagree; others (science, math) agree.Therefore, there are right solutions, but some teachers' views of the tablets are obscured. Therefore, student's task is to learn the right solutions and ignore the others.
2) Multiplicity/Subjective Knowledge: There are conflicting answers;
therefore, students must trust their "inner voices", not external authority.
a) Early Multiplicity: There are 2 kinds of problems: those whose solutions we know and those whose solutions we don't know yet  (thus, a kind of dualism).
Student's task is to learn how to find the right solutions.
b) Late Multiplicity: Most problems are of the second kind; therefore, everyone has a right to their own opinion, or some problems are unsolvable; therefore, it doesn't matter which (if any) solution you choose. Student's task is to shoot the bull.
(Most freshman were found to be at this position, which is a kind of relativism). At this point, some students become alienated, and either retreat to an earlier ("safer") position ("I think I'll study math, not literature, because there are clear answers and not as much uncertainty") or else escape (drop out) ("I can't stand college; all they want is right answers" or else "I can't stand college; no one gives you the right answers".)  Perhaps we evolve into Multiplists after we learn things tacitly and have internal or implicit "feelings" or intuitions about things, but not conscious or explicit beliefs that can be explained or justified.
3) Relativism/Procedural Knowledge: There are disciplinary reasoning methods:
Connected knowledge: empathetic (why do you believe X?; what does this poem say to me?) vs. separated knowledge: "objective analysis" (what techniques can I use to analyze this poem?)
a) Contextual Relativism: All proposed solutions are supported by reasons; i.e., must be viewed in context and relative to support. Some solutions are better than others, depending on context. Student's task is to learn to evaluate solutions. 
Perhaps we then evolve into Contextual Relativists when we can express our intuitions in language and seek justifications for them and relationships among them.
4) Commitment
a) Pre-Commitment: Student sees the necessity of making choices committing to a solution .
b) Commitment/Constructed Knowledge: Integration of knowledge learned from others with personal experience and reflection.
c) Commitment: Student makes a commitment. Challenges to commitment:
Student experiences implications of commitment. Student explores issues of responsibility.
d) Post-Commitment: Student realizes commitment is an ongoing, unfolding, evolving activity. The journey is sometimes repeated; and one can be at different stages at the same time with respect to different subjects.
References:
Perry, William G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Perry, William G., Jr. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The Making of meaning. In Arthur W. The Modern American College (pp 76-116).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Belenky, M. F.,  Clinchy, B.; Goldberger, N.R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books
You can find much material on William Perry's work searching in the Internet. I attach to my answer to your question a file I found in the Internet.
I hope that I have got your answer and that this helps.
Best regards and good luck for your research
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
23 answers
I have read some views claiming that Vygotskian learning theory is a constructivist, similar to Piaget's learning theory.  But I have some reservations on this because Piaget's theory about learning is based on genetic epistemology but for Vygotsky's theory is based on mediation or specifically the ZPD.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dennis
Let me start by saying that you raise an interesting and highly debated question: You ask the following: Are Vygotsky and Piaget really constructivist?  You keep on saying that you have read some views claiming that Vygotskian learning theory is a constructivist, similar to Piaget's learning theory. You add that you have some reservations on this because Piaget's theory about learning is based on genetic epistemology but for Vygotsky's theory is based on mediation or specifically the ZPD.
As you certainly know, constructivism has a lot of meanings and it is often confounded with social constructionism. It is noted, however, that contrary to the postmodern constructionist claim that all knowledge is socially constructed, constructivists accounts assume that individuals all construct essentially the same understanding of knowledge and value as a result of their interactions with the physical and social worlds. In this sense, Piaget is to constructivism such as Vygotsky is to constructionism.
 Constructivist approaches to development and education emphasize the importance of one’s own actions on one’s development and education. In this sense, both Piaget and Vygotsky may be considered constructivist authors for they both put a great emphasis on the importance of action on the genesis of the diverse forms of intelligence (Piaget), and on all functions of consciousness (Vygotsky). Note that according to Piaget [1964, p. 176, Development and learning. In R. Ripple, & U. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press] “To know an object is to act on it. To know is to modify, to transform the object, and to understand the process of this transformation”. In the same vein, for Vygotsky (1962, p. 153. Thought and language, Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press). “In the beginning was the deed. The word was not the beginning--action was there first; it is the end of development, crowning the deed.”  
As I see it, although there is a crucial, and generally unnoticed difference between P & V, they both share the following (1) a genetic (i.e., developmental) perspective; (2) a dialectical approach; (3) a non-reductionist view; (4) a non-dualistic thesis; (5) a primacy of processes over external contents or outcomes; and (6) a focus on qualitative changes over quantitative ones (see, for this respect, an article I published, in 2012, in New Ideas in Psychology, and titled: Piaget and Vygotsky: Many resemblances and a crucial difference, which I attach to my answer to your question.
I partly agree with you when you say that Piaget’s learning theory heavily relies on his genetic or developmental epistemology. I say partly, because Piaget’s learning theory also greatly relies on his theory of the individual’s psychological cognitive and moral development. In contrast to this, and as you noted, Vygotsky’s theory of learning is largely based on his socio-cultural and even historical theory, namely on his famous notion of zone of proximal development (ZPD), that is, “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86, Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
All that said, I think that, even though Vygotskian learning theory may be considered a constructivist theory, his theory is not as constructivist as Piaget's learning theory is. Note, among others, the following aspects: (1) Vygotsky’s mediational learning theory (i.e., “We learn and become ourselves through others”) has a constructionist flavor that does not exist in Piaget’s theory; (2) Psychogenesis is a key concept more in Piaget’s theory than in Vygotsky’s; (3) The opposite is true regarding the key concept of socio-genesis: (4) Piaget’ learning theory is mainly based on his epistemological assumptions and psychological developmental findings, whereas Vygotsky’s leaning theory is guided by his social and even Marxist views. (5) To a great extent, transformation is to Piaget as transmission is to Vygotsky: (5) Piaget was mainly interested, as it were, in one’s relatively spontaneous and natural development and learning, whereas Vygotsky was mainly concerned with one’s cultural development and learning. I could make this list a longer list.
Here, I do not say more because my article mentioned above may give you some hints on the difference and similarities between these two geniuses of developmental psychology. Needless to say, not all who are familiar with both Piaget’s and Vygotsky’ oeuvre will share what I say in my article mentioned above.
I hope I have got your question and that this helps.
Best regards.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
37 answers
Stephen Hawking uses his cheek muscles contractions that are detected by a sensor attached to a branch of his glasses, which can thus select the letters on a virtual keyboard of a tablet which a slider sweeps permanently the alphabet, one by one, then select words using a predictive algorithm since 2001. This system allows him to speak five words per minute and to give classes at the University of Cambridge until 2009. Borrowed and translated from https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking
Various perspectives, such as enactivism, phenomenology, embodied cognition, and so on, postulate that the human being thinks through his body, and not only with his brain. But what about Stephen Hawking phenomenon? His motor skills are so much reduced. My question is: Does Stephen Hawking phenomenon contradicts the premise.
Hawking's motility is indeed very small, but he can communicate with his reduced motor skills and with the help of the infrared sensor, which extends his body. So my question: Does this reduced motility allow him to think or would he be able to think anyway even without any motility. I lean toward the former hypothesis. What is your own opinion?
ADD: my English writing is bad. Just in case, I wanted to say that I lean toward the first hyothesis stating that Stephen Hawking thinks through his reduced motility, and so I don't lean toward the second hypothesis. 
Relevant answer
Answer
Domenico:
The important thing, I think, is to keep an open mind, and to be enactively flexible when a new (from a personal perspective) experience challenges what one imagines one "knows."
Luis:
Thanks for the links. On with the search!
Postscript:
Connect the audio output device, turn up the volume, and click here:
Plan B, in case the latter link becomes inactive:
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
4 answers
I'm examining the effect on domestic politics of recognition from international society.  That is, when international society recognises a certain situation in a nation it causes change to occur (when a bunch of other conditions are also met).
My other independent variables are all accounted for, but I'm having trouble operationalising the process of legitimation from the international community.
Relevant answer
Answer
If you have access via library or other source to 'Global Institutions and development' edited by Morten Bøås and Desmond McNeill (2004), a useful chapter to read is #14 (The power of ideas by James J Hentz). When policy ideas gain international currency (i.e. global legitimacy), many national governments start considering how they can incorporate these into the domestic political arena.
One example I've looked at was the idea of 'freedom of information' (related also to data protection issues) that came to the fore in OECD member nations during the early 1980's. As a result, many of these nations introduced legislation aimed at giving citizens better access to government information and the right to correct errors in own personal data recorded therein. This, of course, does not mean that access to information actually was free nor improved in next one or two decades but at least provided grounds for citizens to raise complaints, queries and agitation...!
There are quite a few 'good practice' reports/manuals in the OECD resource library that document ideas tried out in developing countries (as well as advanced economies) that have achieved international recognition and been spread as 'good' if not 'best 'practice. The bureaucrats in many countries reference this when introducing policy policy proposals to their government/ ministry.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
10 answers
Social constructivism theory has its share from criticisms and disadvantages. Can you tell what is it?
Relevant answer
Answer
I recently wrote a paper published in The Clearing House: A Journal of Methods that explored some problems with contructivism as pedagogical practice focusing on "activity".  However, within, I address a few major problems of social constructivism for learning:
  1) Because schema are formed by building knowledge on prior knowledge, if we seek to promote a "social constructivist" environment we almost necessarily must abandon the idea that actual truth exists.  This is a major problem because to endorse pure relativism is utterly in vain.  Hard relativism is internally contradictory and, thus, necessarily false.  
However, if we endorse a "social constructivist" classroom where the group determines what is true, we adhere to this fallacious view.  I would argue that this is among the most pressing problems of such an approach.
Here is a link to the article I mentioned if you'd like to read the whole thing (you'll probably need to log in through your campus library to get access)
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
James claimed that a belief was only true if it only worked for all of us, and guided us through our world.  This seems to be a form of constructivism denying the absolute objective external reality.
Relevant answer
Answer
New Ideas in Psychology published recently a special issue on  William James. I think that you can benefit from reading such issue.
I think that William James was, so to speak, a constructivist avant la letre, just because, to some extent, he denied the existence  of an absolute external reality. Or, in other words, what would be the meaning of an absolute external reality if it could not be acted upon. As Piaget put it, objects exit outside. However, this would be a poor concept of objects.. Objects acquire meaning while we can act upon them, such as is the case when we touch them (motor action) or when we classify, count, rank order them(a mental action).
Note that we should be  aware that, constructivism a la Piaget or a la James has nothing to do with social constructionism a la K. Gergen, just to give an example. Contrary to postmodern constructionism claim that all knowledge and value is socially constructed, constructivist accounts assume that individuals all construct essentially the same understanding of knowledge and value as a result of their interactions with the physical and social worlds. A I see him, William James is a constructivist, not a constructionist-     
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
9 answers
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.
Relevant answer
Answer
Welcome.
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
9 answers
The identities to be considered include as a state, a developing country, and a rising power. The national interests to be considered include survival. economic development, and status. 
What should I consider when I apply Wendt's constructivism approach to a case study of a conflict of national interest between two states?
Relevant answer
Answer
If you're looking for a way to synthesise a realist concept like the national interest and constructivist variables like identities/culture, see my paper 'systemic pressures and domestic ideas (plug done!). Also barkin realist-constructivism. 
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
11 answers
both Piaget and Vygotsky are considered as exponents of Constructivism, but still they differ in their emphasis that i need to get clarification
Relevant answer
Answer
Piaget concerned with the cognitive structure, to start from known to unknown and to find relevant connections between knowledge inside classrooms and its applications outside the school. Vygotsky has two main domain of the concept, the first is the cognitive constructivism which very closed to Piaget and the second is the social constructivism which investigate the importance of building concepts and acquiring skills in a social context that gives the learner proper help in the right time which so-called scaffolding process and it suppose that the learner can obtain knowledge and skills from the teacher and class-mate better than depending only on himself without hints. Vygotsky and others referred to one reaction when student receive proper hint in the right time which called Aha reaction and then he/she can build on that hint to reach the targeted goals step by step (Scaffolding).
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
7 answers
The dubiousness of forecasting from the perspective of social constructivism comes from the very character of social sciences. Therefore the limits of constructivist forecasting are exactly the same as in case of every endeavor of forecasting in social sciences, even with the use of rationalist paradigm. The only difference and advantage of social constructivism at the same time is that constructivism accepts these imitations and incorporates them into conclusions about the future.
Relevant answer
Answer
Paul,
very reasonable skepticism, and exactly that we are going to address. To cut long story short - it won't be forecasting, but predicting. And it will always operate with probability. We are convinced that our framework will make such redefined forecasting viable. Of course if one will accept obvious limitations that we face in social science. 
Best,
Karol
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
17 answers
Hi there. 
Im currently working on my MA dissertation and im writing about epistemology and theoretical perspectives. I thought that constructivism and interpretivism are the same but ive been reading and it seems i might be mistaken.
Could someone please explain the difference or provide references as to where i might find the distinction?
Also, what is the actual difference between epistemology and theoretical perspective?
Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
Hi Ramy:
Here's a link to simplified answer to your question:
Best regards,
Debra
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
4 answers
By 'concrete concept', I mean everyday concepts such as book, chair, cat, dog _ which overlap with natural kinds.
Relevant answer
Answer
In the two (probably) most quoted/famous references about repertory grid you may find many examples referring to concrete concepts: (i) Jankowitcz's The Easy Guide to Repertory Grids; (ii) Fransella's A Manual for Repertory Grid Tecnique. There many studies about that, such as consumer's choices: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/13522750010333889
You may also consider another PCP technique: laddering or pyramiding. It may help you in understand the personal meaning/formation of concrete concepts (see "Personal Construct Methodology")
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
22 answers
Many secondary source texts do not address the evolution of Alfred Adler's theory; that is, his movement from psychoanalysis to his later (1920 - 37) theory and practice ideas that integrate cognitive, constructivist, existential-humanistic, systemic, and psychodynamic perspectives. Much of contemporary psychology, psychotherapy, and counseling is replete with Adler's ideas although they use different nomenclature and almost never mention Alfred Adler.  Albert Ellis stated that "Adler, perhaps more than Freud, is true father of modern psychotherapy."  The existential psychiatrist, Henri Ellenberger, said that no author's work has been used more and acknowledged less than Alfred Adler.  The theory textbooks by Corey and Prochaska and Norcross echo the statements by Ellis and Ellenberger.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello, Richard and Béatrice. To answer the question baldly is "No," and I confess that I had not picked up subsequently on Adler's evolution. My excuse is that I hail from the Rogerian camp. Having gotten that out of the way, I am greatly intrigued by several aspects of your conversation. Neither in order nor exclusively: (1) The study and appreciation of the growth and development of the ideas of any great thinker is always enlightening. (2) The notion of power, rather than pleasure, being fundamental to the psychology of neurosis rings true if one considers human evolution (the archaeology of neurosis and the theoretical reconstruction of human development, as it were). (3) Which leaves me in a position. The link to Durbin 2004 <http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-128445468.html> goes to an Oops page, regrettably.  I am left, as an unwashed and unlearned undergraduate, seeking bibliographical signposts. Where do you suggest I begin?
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
14 answers
And if Experiential Learning is based on Constructivism, what procedures or methods have you applied to evaluate your students (in sustainability education)? Are these procedures different from traditional methods of evaluation such as (objective) exams and essays? How do you evaluate the Construction of Mental Models of your students? Best wishes and happy new year!
Relevant answer
Answer
Farley,
You asked, Why is Objectivism used in Blended Learning, instead of Constructivist approaches? And: "Is Teaching an Art?" I mean, do we all forgot teachers, and concentrate to learners (students)?
I will offer my humble response to all three questions by referring you to the process of developing schools as learning organizations (LO) through communities of practice (CoP). Developing CoP requires shifting the bureaucratic model to a collaborative model focused on student outcomes. Therefore the focus is turned from evaluating what teachers do to observing what students do as a result of the teaching process and within a specific organizational culture.
Next, there are barriers to developing OL, though OL is desirable because it has been shown to result in improved student outcomes.  The lack of ability, motivation, and opportunity to transfer implicit knowledge creation between units within the organization, retain it, and apply it as student outcomes have been shown to be barriers to OL (Bartsch, Ebers & Maurer, 2012).
Creating CoP in schools has been shown to be key in developing OL and building capacity.  Administrators have influence on organizational culture and can provide resources to structure the organization in ways that promote "the daily habit of working together" (Fullan, 2005, p. 69).  When individuals build intra-organizational ties it increases capacity to overcome the obstacles to Organizational Learning (Bartsch, Ebers, Maurer, 2012).
Finally, the constructivist approach has through newer research been developed further to a cognitive sociocultural approach (Vygotsky, 1962) and includes co-construction of new knowledge between the individual and social group. This occurs in OL when the new knowledge is retained in the organization. Therefore to accomplish this requires the daily opportunity to work together and produce reciprocal projections in the organizational environment. The result is the development of the organization's identity/memory and feedback to the individuals within the organization on how to behave.
In sum, Objectivism can be used as part of teaching strategies in a Blended Learning Environment if shown to successfully produce observable student outcomes of new knowledge construction that is meaningful.  Meaningful learning transfers to new situations and therefore results in the outcomes defined under Constructivist approaches that consider learner agency as key.
Whether teaching is viewed as an Art or Science is dependent upon the observer and is therefore a valid perspective to the individual. Further, I do not think the research suggests we forget about teachers, though in creating learning organizations the focus shifts from observing teachers to observing and measuring student outcomes.
Therefore, teacher behavior is less relevant than the outcomes observed by students in response to teacher behavior. The key is to develop opportunities for teachers to work together, share their practices, including expert advise and support, develop shared values, norms, vision, and goals that match the collective mind and result in student meaningful learning.
Your questions are key to the new research and approaches to educational leadership, organizational learning, and psychosocial elements included in assessment models for the development of meaningful learning in schools.
Well done Farley,
Janet
  • asked a question related to Constructivism
Question
8 answers
where is its origin? is this the same with creative approach?
Relevant answer