Module 4

Q1: Explain in your own words the principal contributions of Piaget's cognitive constructivist theory as a theory of learning. Make a list of questions you still have

Piaget's cognitive construction theory outlined the different stages that children pass through in their life. Specifically, these stages identified key skills that students were able and not able to do during the particular stage of development. This is extremely important for both parents and educators, because it discussed how children cognitively learn in particular ages of development. Ultimately, this sets guidelines for educators so that we are able to provide information that is developmentally appropriate. This theory also proposed the idea that students construct their own meaning of new information, in a multitude of ways.
Questions I have: Minds of younger children grow so fast, so in a first grade classroom that has students that could be up to a year apart, how do you address students who may be entering into a new stage of development?
Also, how would Piaget address gifted students in the classroom who currently lack the motivation to challenge themselves?

Q2: Make a connection between Piaget's stages of development and what James argued the teacher should know about cognitive development.

I thought about James quite often while reading about Piaget. The first thing that stood out to me was that both psychologists recognize the importance of our environments. As a school psychologist, this is something that we must do every day in our work. The environment has so many effects on how a student learns. James discusses the stream of consciousness and the importance of the teacher getting that stream to focus on instruction. Piaget argues that the learner is greatly affected by their environment, with factors like culture playing a vital role.

Both of these theorists also agree that learning can be enhanced by having a connection to the material. Piaget supports that students can construct their own meaning of new information, while James also supports this since he believes that learning is all about associations that people make. People make all different types of associations, so therefore the learning is constructed by the learner themselves. It is absolutely crazy to me that these theorists developed these ideas so long ago, but most of their arguments still explain learning today.

Q3: What would authors Airasian and Walsh have to say about the learning environment in which Bart was placed? Is this an example of constructivism? What are your own thoughts about constructivism as a theory of learning so far?

Airasian and Walsh would support the environment that Bart was placed. This was definitely a constructivist type of classroom, where students were given the freedom to learn how they wanted. The students in the classroom explored their own learning, where the teacher guided them through the learning process, as opposed to the teacher being the person who delivered the content of the learning process.

If you asked me 5 years ago what I thought about constructivism, I would have thought that no one would learn under these circumstances. I do however think that constructivism can be effective in particular situations. I think constructivism can be such an asset sometimes, because it allows students to guide their own learning, which can ultimately foster even more curiosity of a particular subject. For example, in elementary school my teacher allowed me to do a project and learn about any artist. I chose Monet, and I went to a museum with my grandmother to explore his work. Because of this, I wanted to continue to learn more and more about this artist.

I enjoyed reading about the social-constructivist theory of learning, for it reminds us as educators that students are ultimately affected and closely affected by their immediate environment.