Muhammad Betz (mbetz@sosu.edu)
Thu, 3 Jun 1999 12:03:58 -0500
From: "Muhammad Betz" <mbetz@sosu.edu> Subject: Pedagogy or Learning? Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 12:03:58 -0500
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.gmd.de/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, I continue to be unsure of contributors who suggest
"Constructivism" as a method... when it is a theory. Any teaching method
is "constructivist" if you adopt the point of view that constructivism is
the way humans come to know. Martin Owen
Hello IEFTS'ers:
Thanks to Martin Owen for contribution to the origins of Constructivism, as
a psychological theory. Yet his contribution accentuates a problem one
often encounters when reading and contributing to IEFTS, i.e., the confusion
of which aspect of a topic is really being discussed: the theoretical or the
pragmatic, a clinical setting or a field-based setting, a Piaget or a
Papert. [One recalls that Piaget studied under Henri Bergson (Philosopher)
who studied under Claude Bernard (Physiologist). Aristotle also studied
under Plato, yet their dissimilarities are well known.]
If there is a point to be made here, it seems to relate to Owen's the
statement, "Any teaching method is constructivist, if you adopt the point of
view that constructivism is the way humans come to know." The argument (in
a constructive sense) that has been evidenced in this Forum, relates to
instructional techniques based on either so-called constructivist or
behaviorist approaches.
In the context of learning theory, the dichotomy as I have come to know it,
polarizes cognitive versus behavioral premises. The behavioral premise is
that learning takes place as the result of the manipulation of
external/physical antecedents, reinforcers, and punishments, while the
cognitive premise is that learning takes place when the learner manipulates
sense and data to form mental constructs, such as schemas, or a gestalt, if
you will.
Those of us who argue against the proponents of an EXCLUSIVE type of
pedagogy, often called constructivist, which is open-ended,
inquiry-oriented, and learner driven are only trying to make the point,
implied by Owen's remark, that a pedagogy need not be Constructivist for
cognitive, constructive learning to take place.
Best Wishes,
Muhammad Betz, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Southeastern Oklahoma State University
Durant, OK
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu 03 Jun 1999 - 19:56:24 MET DST