Navigate KTM
- KitchenTableMath
- What's New
- FAQ
- Book-style Index
- Ask a Question
- Search Comments
- Search Blog Posts
- Monthly Archives
- Search by Category
- Register as a User
- Register as our Guest
Kitchen Table Math
KTM User Pages
Service Groups
- Mathematically Correct
- WhatWorksClearinghouse
- Progressive Policy Institute
- Education Trust
- Illinois Loop
- Fordham Foundation
- New York City HOLD
Parent Groups
- Plano Parent Rights
- Informed Residents of Reading
- Teach Us Math
- Save Our Children from Mediocre Math
Personal Pages
Blogs
- Animals In Translation
- Eduwonk
- The Education Wonks
- Instructivist
- Jenny D
- Joanne Jacobs
- Learning Curves
- Math And Text
- MathMan
- Number 2 Pencil
- Oh, snap!
- Parent Pundit
- Vlorbik
- D-Ed Reckoning
- Teens And Tweens
Special lists
Help
31 Jul 2005 - 23:02
created by Elizabeth Murphy, professor, writer, researcher, and inquirer.
Constructivism: From Philosophy to Practice
Back to main page.
Please consider registering as a regular user.
Look here for syntax help.
Catherine, Why do you torture us (smile) with these constructivism links? Like this ... "Agreement on a constructivist theory of learning is not widespread due largely to what Derry (1996) terms "ethnocentrism within various constructivisms". At the same time, Ernest (1995) notes that, of seven paradigms of constructivism, the positions are all variants of radical constructivism. The outstanding consideration, however, concerns the need as Ernst sees it: "to accommodate the complementarity between individual construction and social interaction" (p.483)." As someone I know would say: "blah, blah, woof, woof!" And, we have this: "Constructivism does not claim to have made earth-shaking inventions in the area of education; it merely claims to provide a solid conceptual basis for some of the things that, until now, inspired teachers had to do without theoretical foundation. E. Von Glasersfeld (1995) " Constructivism is both something and nothing at all! Use it to justify whatever you want. What is knowledge? What is truth? What is understanding? What is 6 times 7? Looking at the NAEP test questions and answers, one is left with the feeling that something is horribly, terribly wrong, and it has nothing to do with the meaning of knowledge, understanding, or constructivism. Constructivism is meaningless if you are heading in the wrong direction, and anyone can swap depth for breadth. I always think of the child-centered, mixed ability, discovery group where one student gets the discovery-like "light bulb" idea and then proceeds to directly teach it to the other kids in the group. Does this mean that only one child gets the benefit of constructivism and has true understanding? Do the other kids receive the benefits of constructivism when directly taught by a peer rather than by a teacher? Why do teachers go to college? Does this ruin their ability to teach? I actually like constructivism, but I just call it homework. -- SteveH - 01 Aug 2005
This is hilarious!!!!! Blah, blah, woof, woof! That's going in Wit and Wisdom of Kitchen Table Math. (Do you realize you've got the top 3 Wit and Wisdom sayings?) If this keeps up we're going to have to call it Steve H's Wit and Wisdom of Kitchen Table Math -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Aug 2005
OK, go check out Wit and Wisdom. Steve now has 4 sayings. -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Aug 2005
I've actually sincerely tried to understand phrases like the one that Steve quotes. I start parsing 'em, word by word, until my brain either gives out, or I've got the whole thing loaded into memory. And even then, the sentences seem fragmented and unrelated. But I think that whole phrase can be boiled down as follows: Constructivists have turf wars like everyone else, but all the major variants have a lot in common. Blah, blah, woof, woof. -- CarolynJohnston - 01 Aug 2005
a constructivist checklist
created by Elizabeth Murphy, professor, writer, researcher, and inquirer.
Constructivism: From Philosophy to Practice
Back to main page.
Comments
After entering a comment, users can login anonymously as KtmGuest (password: guest) when prompted.Please consider registering as a regular user.
Look here for syntax help.
Catherine, Why do you torture us (smile) with these constructivism links? Like this ... "Agreement on a constructivist theory of learning is not widespread due largely to what Derry (1996) terms "ethnocentrism within various constructivisms". At the same time, Ernest (1995) notes that, of seven paradigms of constructivism, the positions are all variants of radical constructivism. The outstanding consideration, however, concerns the need as Ernst sees it: "to accommodate the complementarity between individual construction and social interaction" (p.483)." As someone I know would say: "blah, blah, woof, woof!" And, we have this: "Constructivism does not claim to have made earth-shaking inventions in the area of education; it merely claims to provide a solid conceptual basis for some of the things that, until now, inspired teachers had to do without theoretical foundation. E. Von Glasersfeld (1995) " Constructivism is both something and nothing at all! Use it to justify whatever you want. What is knowledge? What is truth? What is understanding? What is 6 times 7? Looking at the NAEP test questions and answers, one is left with the feeling that something is horribly, terribly wrong, and it has nothing to do with the meaning of knowledge, understanding, or constructivism. Constructivism is meaningless if you are heading in the wrong direction, and anyone can swap depth for breadth. I always think of the child-centered, mixed ability, discovery group where one student gets the discovery-like "light bulb" idea and then proceeds to directly teach it to the other kids in the group. Does this mean that only one child gets the benefit of constructivism and has true understanding? Do the other kids receive the benefits of constructivism when directly taught by a peer rather than by a teacher? Why do teachers go to college? Does this ruin their ability to teach? I actually like constructivism, but I just call it homework. -- SteveH - 01 Aug 2005
This is hilarious!!!!! Blah, blah, woof, woof! That's going in Wit and Wisdom of Kitchen Table Math. (Do you realize you've got the top 3 Wit and Wisdom sayings?) If this keeps up we're going to have to call it Steve H's Wit and Wisdom of Kitchen Table Math -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Aug 2005
OK, go check out Wit and Wisdom. Steve now has 4 sayings. -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Aug 2005
I've actually sincerely tried to understand phrases like the one that Steve quotes. I start parsing 'em, word by word, until my brain either gives out, or I've got the whole thing loaded into memory. And even then, the sentences seem fragmented and unrelated. But I think that whole phrase can be boiled down as follows: Constructivists have turf wars like everyone else, but all the major variants have a lot in common. Blah, blah, woof, woof. -- CarolynJohnston - 01 Aug 2005
| WebLogForm | |
|---|---|
| Title: | a constructivist checklist |
| TopicType: | WebLog |
| SubjectArea: | ConstructivistTeaching |
| LogDate: | 200507311901 |