text:
Learning theories in practice/Constructivism/Math

Constructivism… in a Math classroom instruction?
Garelick (2005) provides a brief synopsis of the state of math education in the US in K-12. In his article, he characterizes typical but certainly not all practices in math teaching, focusing on constructivist learning theory and how it is incorporated in a series of textbooks that have far reaching influence.

The objective of this monograph is to contrast my personal teaching practice in a Houston Independent School District (HISD) elementary school against the major contributions of constructivist theorists, their epistemological considerations, and the practice derived from its framework, which are deeply connected and provide structuring forces upon each other (Ainley & Pratt, 2001).

Furthermore, it attempts to demystify the general presumption that constructivism is the law of the day in mathematics teaching in elementary school settings. Such myths seem to be common in the general public beliefs, as well as educators, in regards to the nature of constructivism and its application in US schools’ instruction (Clements, 1997).

As part of my practice as a Math teacher in an elementary school within HISD, I consciously attempt to incorporate some strategies that would be definitively characterized as a constructivist approach to teaching. Following in line with this paper’s objective I will attempt to shed some light on whether or nor it is at all possible to call my teaching constructivist and, by extension, to critique the idea that there is a constructivist reform movement (Andrew, 2007) going on in the current educational system in United States in general, and, in particular, in Houston, Texas.

Constructivism
Many scholars are considered to be contributors to the development of the constructivist approach. Constructivism, though, is not an instructional theory but rather a learning approach. In this way, it is considered a philosophy frame describing the way humans learn more than a theory in education. Consequently, the descriptions of learning and cognition posited by constructivism do not prescribe a set of applicable teaching methods (Skott, 2004).

Constructivism views learning as an experiential process. It assumes humans can’t know the world as it is because there can’t be proved there is such a thing as objective cogniscence of the outside world. So, there is not outside truth that can be apprehended and, therefore, taught. In contrast, humans compare their learning and arrive to a canonical knowledge via intersubjectivity. Thus, there is not such a thing as shared knowledge. From this concept, constructivism is highly critical of the way children are taught truths fixed to a bank, or the “banking system” in Freire’s words, where teachers impart instruction and children passively absorb knowledge and skills. The typical picture of students seated and a teacher standing lecturing comes to mind immediately.

A central idea within constructivism is that learners play an active role in their own learning process so their interests, prior knowledge and past experiences should be taken into account when deciding the curriculum, the content, the methods and the evaluation of the learning process. They are active learners and there is an organic connection between education and personal experience (Dewey 1938, p. 25, cited by Edna, 1999). As consequence, students make concepts their own by manipulating concrete objects, through hands on activities, by playing with realia and having concrete relationship with their environment that provides the contextual fabric to their learning. In Mathematics, this means solving real life problems by manipulating concrete models that represent a real context to the problem. A typical example within this purpose would be the extensive use of multibase arithmetic blocks (MAB) created by Denis, now known as base 10 blocks (Edna, 1999).

The learning process is focused more on the process itself than on the outcome. Answers are derived as consequence of the process that makes the learner develop knowledge and construct meaning from within. So making sense of the learning object, usually through real life problems, take a central stage in the teaching-learning environment as that of a school classroom.

It is mandatory that verbal interactions be part of the process in which groups of students collaboratively search for solutions to those problems. Speech mediates conceptual development. Students are encouraged to communicate their thinking in this way, combining and sharing their learning via verbal exchanges with colleagues. This tenet of constructivism, central to Vygostky’s idea of learning, states that we learn in contact with others and we never learn in isolation. However, must not be thought that this is the so called discovery learning, in which students take their own way, develop their own thinking and knowledge and arrive to any conclusion they come up with. On the contrary, since constructivism is a learning approach, not an instructional strategy, there is no such a prescription in it (Anderson & Piazza, 1996), and teachers - or facilitators, or guides - play a fundamental role in having learners develop the conceptual framework that is conventionally accepted (Ward, 2001). If 5 groups of 5 could be represented by 5 baskets containing 5 eggs, then the result students must arrive at is 25 and the operation applicable to it could be either 5 added 5 times (5+5+5+5+5+5=25) or 5 times 5 (5 x 5 = 25). This is one of the major misconceptions of constructivism in which it is associated with laizze faire in the classroom and that everybody can do whatever they want and arrive at any conclusion that it seems plausible. This characteristic of the learning process is possible due to the emergent discourse (Leonard, 2000), which occurs when a relaxed from social norms communication happens, in contrast to the rigid top-down institutionalized communication typical of a traditional teaching-student pattern of interaction.

One of the consequences of taking this approach in to a learning setting is that the environment where it is being implemented becomes a dynamic cultural system. Teachers guide the learners’ inquiry to the accepted conventional knowledge within a constructivist cultural system. This is in contrast with the traditional classroom where curriculum, content, methods and strategies are set in advance tightly correlated - and usually within a non-flexible pre-established timeframe.

Students then, become curriculum builders while they work collaboratively with colleagues and teachers to develop their interest, elicit prior knowledge, decide on how to attack the content, and how they are expected to show that they got the content. As Windschitl (1999) puts it, if a class must learn symmetry, one student could choose learn it via symmetry in architecture; another student may choose learn it thorough music and the symmetry manifested in music writing or finding patterns while listening; other student could choose visual arts and patterns in paintings or sculptures while other learner would be learning about symmetry using numbers. Thus, students have content structured only to a moderate degree, and they can contextualize the content in ways that stimulates them. They create the powerful collateral or incidental learning that adds personal meaning to the original theme selected by the teacher. So while everybody’s objective is to make sense of symmetry, each student could take a different process through which make sense of the content, using different themes and concrete realia, and making possible that their performance evaluation be individually suited using authentic assessment.

Another characteristic that would emerge from such a cultural system within this learning environment is that engagements are long-term in the search of, as repeatedly stated above, solutions of real problems. Further, students engage in long-term projects and the development of metacognitive strategies while they reflect on their own learning and the cognitive strategies developed to solve the specific real life problems they help to decide to set up. Efficiency is not a part of this approach. Time management then becomes a secondary issue when it comes to obey a strict relationship between content mastered and time frame. This is in contrast with the standardized curriculum in our current educational systems, which is increasingly being associated with a strict timeframe per topic and subject and standardized tests measuring quantitatively students’ performance.

Standards for Mathematics teachers and instruction
Even Constructivism is not a new idea, in recent years many different professional organizations have embraced the constructivist philosophy of learning and have recommended changes in the way Mathematics is taught, according to Inch (2002). The author, who is not alone in affirming propositions like this one, cites the National Research Council 1989, Grennon Brooks and Brooks 1993, and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) 2000. Accordingly, we can assume following Inch, that the recommendations posted by these organizations would assemble a constructivist learning environment in Mathematics. We will focus on NCTM since I am currently implementing many of their propositions in my teaching and I have attended professional development courses that directed me in that direction.

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) released three documents with the objective of give focus, coherence, and new ideas to efforts to improve Mathematics education in the United States and Canada. Their release of Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics in 1989 articulated goals for teachers and policymakers in Mathematics. In 1991 the NCTM published Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics, which described the elements of effective mathematics teaching. Assessment Standards for School Mathematics, which appeared in 1995, established objectives against which assessment practices can be measured. Aiming at revising and evaluating the standards to maintain their relevance NCTM appointed a commission to recommend how they could proceed to keep the standards current and relevant. As a result, the Standards 2000 project was begun in 1997, with the appointment of a Writing Group to produce an updated Standards document and an Electronic Format Group to produce an electronically enhanced version of that document. The exchanges between these two groups and other outside inputs resulted in a book, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, which is recommended by NCTM as a source to improve mathematics curricula, teaching, and assessment (NCTM, 2007).

A good summarization of the NCTM perspective about how Math teaching should look like and be portrayed is in Lawson (1997). We synthesized her summary in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1. NCTM perspective on Curriculum and Evaluation for high quality Math teaching

INSERT TABLE 1

Note: Based on Lawson (1997)

Table 2. NCTM perspective on Professional Standards for high quality Math teaching

INSERT TABLE 2

Note: Based on Lawson (1997)

Additionally, the NCTM's Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM 2000) included a new process standard that addresses representations (emphasis ours) as a key element in developing conceptual mathematical understanding (Schultz & Water, 2000).

These guidelines have become lighthouses in the direction to which Math teaching has been going in the last decades. Scholars and researchers mention the ongoing revolution in Math teaching (Arthurs, 1999) that follows these precepts, and many people call themselves constructivist teachers, in one hand, without fully understanding its implications and, on the other, they want to be perceived as doing the right thing (Brewer & Daane, 2002). Now in spite of the above Inch’s affirmation that the NCTM recommendations imply a return to constructivism in Mathematics teaching, in fact, such recommendations could be part of any educational theory or pedagogical approach to instruction.

In order to evaluate these propositions as pertaining intrinsically to a constructivist approach to education of Mathematics, I will describe my elementary Math teaching practice in light of the ongoing 'constructivist revolution.'

My teaching practice
Like any other teacher in this profession, I deal with intrinsic and extrinsic aspects in terms of the professional activity I perform daily in the school setting. Due to time constrains related to any human activity, one must consider the amount of time allocated to any task within his work environment so one can account for the real dedication of the actual professional activity in question. For example, if an accounting employee must answer two hundred emails a day, his accounting tasks will be hinder by the allocation of resources to answering emails.

Likewise, teachers must allocate time and resources to activities extrinsic to the actual learning process to which schools should be fully dedicated to. With the risk of oversimplification, I present figure 1 in which the analogy of a funnel is presented with the intention of graphing the point of contact between teachers and learners and how that point is the funnel tip of many other activities completely extrinsic to the learning process. Form collecting pictures’ money and forms and attending software vendors’ presentations to evaluate the “suitability” of the software for learners’ needs, to allocating time for meetings and paperwork dealing with anything but the learning process of the students. So the time limitations to effectively dedicate all energy and resources to the learning process is undermined by all extrinsic activities teachers are subjected to, and therefore decreasing the concentration of the teacher on planning and leading the learning process.

Let the representation of figure 1 be a contextual frame for the alleged constructivist environment under which Mathematics is currently taught in the United States. Figure 1. Point of contact between learner and teacher as the vehicle for extrinsic and intrinsic educational activities

INSERT FIGURE 1

In regards to the intrinsic aspects of my professional practice I divide it in planning and instruction.

Planning relates to all activities related to the preparation of lesson plans, content, materials and activities for a particular theme or topic. The Texas law entitles every teacher to planning and preparation through the Planning and preparation time – Texas Education Code Sec. 21.404. During the teacher’s planning periods the district, or the school administration, can require the teacher to engage in no activity other than parent-teacher conferences, evaluating student work, and planning. Teachers must have at least 450 minutes of planning time every two weeks in increments of not less than 45 minutes within the instructional day (Texas Classroom Teachers Association, 2007). I have a hard time recollecting myself having 450 minutes of uninterrupted planning in any given 2-week period in my almost 5 years of teaching. An informal assessment on my colleagues would probably reflect the same impression, with those with over 15 years of experience stating how much the situation has worsen in the last decade. Thus if in order to prepare relevant concrete experiences a teacher must have plenty of time available to actually find the material relevant to the content, my current situation in this regard is far from the ideal. Moreover, if it is desirable to involve other persons that may be part of the real life situation demanded by true constructivism (such as government agency, a company’s personnel, any other organization, etc), we can conclude that the situation obstructs the realization of a constructivist learning experience.

In relation to the instruction, its source is the CLEAR curriculum which follows the mandated TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) established by the TEA (Texas Education Agency). The curriculum is the document where the content and its sequence, the suggested fragmented activities and materials for instruction are placed for the teacher as a “guide” and for the rest of the learning community as a reference. My curriculum is mandated by HISD. Not only the topics and their sequence but also the time allocated for each topic. In figure 2 the reader can see the current 4th grade curriculum for Mathematics for the beginning of the second nine weeks period in the 2007-8 school year. For fractions, the reader can see under the header Time Allocation, there are 13 classes of 90 minutes. Figure 2. Snapshot of HISD curriculum for fractions in 4th grade

INSERT FIGURE 2

If your students get the learning objectives in that time frame you then move on; if the students don’t get it, you move on and other avenues kick in to have them acquire the knowledge and skills. The administration explicitly directs teachers to follow the scope and sequence of the CLEAR curriculum. Otherwise we could arrive to the standardized testing date without having touched a portion of the curriculum. Here we have the first wall in terms of applying anything constructivist in terms if learning experiences for the children.

This happens in the context of having to comply with a daily schedule in which all the subjects have a time slot which terms must be met. As part of these mandatory time slots, my grade level is departmentalized which means that students must rotate at a pre-established time. Therefore, if we are not done with the instruction at let’s say, 10:00AM, when my class needs to rotate for their Language Arts, Reading and Social Studies blocks, there is nothing I can do to flexibly accommodate my timing to make sure the instruction has make it to completion and, hopefully, to fruition. Meaning, the student, the teacher and the learning experience accommodate themselves to the daily schedule, and not the other way around. This is another point in which constructivism becomes an impossible practice.

The time required by a student to make sense of a topic or an activity is dependent on his or her prior knowledge, interests, and cognitive ability, and not to an obligatory rotation set by a clock, written in a document mandated by the school administration.

In addition to the time and the curriculum, there are the activities I plan for my students. I intent to have them speak to each other as much as possible and have them solve problems that can resemble to real life situations using manipulatives that help them construct models that represent reality. For example, the following recount is how I can introduce the concept of multiplication.

I place boxes with plastic manipulatives on the desks of groups. They are seated in groups of four with mixed levels of ability (Usually I place one “low” student, two “average” students, and one “high” student per group, following instructions from an external consultant who, according to their research, is the better way to have collaboratively groups). In addition to the manipulatives I give them a word problem and instruct them to create a visual model that can be used to explain to the rest of the class the solution to the problem. A typical multiplication problem would be like this:

Mrs. Smith has a garden to plan lettuce. She has 9 rows available to plant her lettuce. After planting all the seeds, she noticed that there are thirteen seeds in each row. How many lettuce plants will she be able to eat if all her seeds sprout and grow in to adults lettuce plants?

So the students create a model of the garden using the manipulatives and then all the class moves around the classroom. We review all different strategies and the thinking behind each model and its respective solution to the problem. Any student can ask questions. I usually guide them to come to the conventional or canonical knowledge. For example that we can add up repeatedly the same number of seeds (columns) as many time as the number of rows. So once we create the notion that we can use repeated addition to solve the problem, we move onto the more abstract aspect of it and introduce multiplication. We will repeat this problem solving activity for several days until the majority of the students understood what we did. I then may introduce multiplication related vocabulary and then the algorithm to multiply rows and columns. I will then provide the students with different color grid paper to create arrays to produce their own multiplication tables. We will use the arrays, shown in Picture 1, to help develop models of multiplication, relate it to polygons’ area, for computation purposes, and to memorize the multiplication tables.

Picture 1. Arrays constructed by students using color grid paper

INSERT PICTURE 1

This account is an oversimplification of the instructional strategy I use. Usually some, or even the majority of the students, have heard of multiplication and some even know a procedure to multiply two numbers (usually a two digit number multiplied by a one digit number). But the main point in me doing this is to have them understand and make sense of that when we have groups of equal quantities the most efficient way to find the answer is by multiplying. Also, to understand that even though we can solve it by addition (repeated addition), multiplication or even division (as a family fact of the multiplication expression) they need to develop the concept that what we did was to multiply groups of equal quantities. So I take my students from a very concrete, concept development activity (solving a problem by means of creating a model using manipulatives), to the most abstract use of an algorithm to perform a calculation. Further I attempt this via activity, reflection, and social interaction what would indicate one of the constructivist’s key elements (Bischoff & Golden, 2003).

One can contrast this strategy with the constructivist approach of real life problems derived from the students’ interests and prior knowledge. The fabrication of a real situation in which someone is planting a garden and needs to know how many lettuce plants she will be able to eat at the end of the season, is completely artificial. Even though I set up the experience based on my knowledge of the students (basically on their prior knowledge of addition, multiplication, solving problems strategy, etc), at no point the students are able to interject their input in the design of the learning experience as a whole. So the idea that students become curriculum builders, such as under the assumption of a constructivist approach, it is non-existent in the example provided above. Let us not forget the contextualization of time constrains and mandated curriculum to put things in perspective.

Another characteristic of my teaching is that I provide the students with different approximations to a unit theme. I usually begin a 10 minute Mental Math session in which I give a simple operation (such as 45 – 18 =) and the students must find in their head the answer and then orally explain to the rest of the class how they found it. I follow their oral explanation by posting on the board what they retell, using Mathematical conventional writing. Usually five or six students get to explain their thinking about how they find their answers to the incomplete number sentence provided. After that, I have them solve other simpler problems that can lead them to make connections between the mental math exercise, the simpler problem, and the word problem or problems that they solve by building a model and then explain to their classmates. One of such simpler problems is The Number of the Day in which they can “build” the specific number (or incomplete number sentence) by drawing, making groups, using words, using any of the four operations we use in 4th grade, number patterns, picture patterns, fractions, liquid containers and their capacity, money bills and coins, etc. By doing this I try to have my students make sense that numbers can be chunked and manipulated in any way we want to, with the purpose of giving real life use to such mathematical manipulations, like the operations we use in the classroom all the time.

One could argue that the discourse I am trying to encourage is emergent as opposite to the top down institutionalized discourse. However, there is no relaxed from social norms communication even though everybody participates in the problem solving and all the oral activities I plan as part of my Math lessons. I plan and mandate the activities and at end I will finally evaluate the students’ performance (whether informally or though a project or using a standardized test-like procedure is, relatively speaking, irrelevant; I will have the final word on the grade they’ll get).

The efficiency logic runs supreme when it comes to making any decision in the classroom. All the activities I planned are subject to my immediate reorientation according to my personal evaluation of the time constrains we have in order to complete the review of specific learning objective. So the moral of this story could be: “you participate as much as you want, but when time presses us, I tell you what to do and how so we can finish up and move on.”

When we have to move on because the curriculum suggested time frame points us to do so (the administration directs teachers to follow the time frame of HISD mandated curriculum), those students that did not get the content will receive remediation. How is it that they are selected to received assistance? At the end of the unit (i.e., multiplication), a common assessment (meaning the same test for the seven 4th grade classes in the school) is given. The test is TAKS like, with 4 answer options per word problem (standardized-objective-like examination).

The common assessment results are read by a scanner and fed into a district computer database. Those students who do not pass the common assessment will be required to be tutored by either the classroom teacher in small groups, or an outside tutor, or a software program, or stay in extended day after class. The decisions regarding the type of help made available to this group of students are put together by the school administration. Here we can see how the students’ performances are evaluated through means other than authentic assessments that are provided in a constructivist environment. In a real life situation, the students’ performances could be assessed based on their production generated in solving the problems presented by the learning experience, in contrast to the objective type test.

Discussion
I strived to synthesize the constructivist approach to learning and the standards and suggested approach to teaching Mathematics by NCTM through my personal experience as an elementary school Math teacher.

In lieu of the preceding statement I conclude that being a constructivist is an ideal impossible to put into practice under the current educational system in which I practice my trade. The most important aspects of constructivism cannot take effect because they would go against the most important characteristics of the current educational system. These characteristics relate to a mandated curriculum, and the need of putting efficiency as the motor that runs the system “forward”. Tight time frames linked to topics in the curriculum, suggested segmented activities and their correlation with high stake standardized tests result in a rigid top-down controlled system under which constructivist principles cannot be applied.

This is in spite of all the propaganda advertising the coming of a constructivist wave in which children will choose what to do and will ruin the achievements in accountability registered by the implementation of education law and its programs.


text:
Learning theories in practice/Service learning

Purpose
Across the nation, schools are being challenged to create learning environments that produce critical thinkers. Twenty-first century students can no longer succeed with the memorization and regurgitation of information. The changing face of our world requires us to produce students who are capable of meeting the “demands—civic responsibility demands, digital demands, cognitive demands, global demands—of the twenty-first century” (Beers, 2007). Service learning is a teaching strategy that naturally lends itself to constructivist learning.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the basic concepts of service learning, discuss the need for service learning specifically in alternative school settings, explore the constructivist nature of service learning, and provide concrete examples of how service learning can look. By providing this information, I hope to provide an additional teaching strategy to educators seeking authentic learning experiences for their students.

Definition of Service Learning
Service learning provides “complex teaching and learning environments that are designed to enhance learning through the process of connecting academic course content with service opportunities in the community” (Cress, 2005, p. 1). Service learning is more than a community service program. Service learning incorporates key components of classroom curriculum and gives students a hands-on method of achieving state standard expectations. Learning environments are authentic and student determined, and the teacher serves as a guide on the journey.

There are eight key components to a successful service-learning program. They include: Academic Connections; Authentic Needs Assessment; Community Collaboration; Evaluation; Meaningful Service and Civic Engagement; Recognition and Demonstration; Reflection; and Youth and Student Voice. The following website gives more information about the eight key elements of service learning and training tools for Indiana’s Learn and Serve program: http://doe.state.in.us/opd/srvlrn/key_elements.html

There are many benefits of service learning. Students succeed because they learn to make connections with academic learning and social environments. Communities benefit because citizens learn how to serve and give back. Cathryn Berger Kaye (2004) states, “The beauty of service learning is that something real and concrete is occurring. Learning takes on a new dimension. When students are engaged intellectually and emotionally with a topic, they can light up with a revelation or make a connection between two previously separate ideas” (p. 2).

Eight Key Elements
There are eight key elements to a successful service-learning program:

 * Academic Connections
 * Youth and Student Voice
 * Authentic Needs Assessment
 * Community Collaboration
 * Evaluation
 * Meaningful Service
 * Recognition and Demonstration
 * Reflection

(Eight Key Elements of Service Learning, 2008)

Eight Key Elements Defined

 * Academic Connections - The classroom component is essential for the learning portion of service learning. Academic standards are reached through authentic projects with real purpose.

 * Youth and Student Voice - Students select project and participate in all aspects of project implementation. “Students experience significant age appropriate challenges involving tasks that require thinking, initiative and problem solving as they demonstrate responsibility and decision-making in an environment safe enough to allow them to make mistakes and to succeed” (Eight Elements of Service Learning, 2008).

 * Authentic Needs Assessment - Students perform needs assessments that may include: examining the media, surveys, observations or mapping of local area, or census information.

 * Community Collaboration - Students help establish community partnerships to ensure lasting service-learning results.

 * Evaluation - Students and adult participants should continually evaluate the process and impact of service projects.

 * Meaningful Service - Students include community partners in response to authentic community needs.

 * Recognition and Demonstration - Students need opportunities to demonstrate the new knowledge and experiences they have encountered. This phase should happen throughout the service learning experience.

 * Reflection - Students need reflection to help understand the learning that is occurring before, during, and after service activities.

(Eight Key Elements of Service Learning, 2008)

The Need for Service Learning in Alternative Schools
Alternative schools vary from traditional schools in a variety of ways. The alternative setting in which I work serves at-risk high school students who find it difficult to complete the requirements for a diploma in a traditional setting. We accept students based on one of five reasons derived from the Indiana Department of Education requirements: academic failure, intent to withdraw, student is a parent or an expectant parent, employment, or disruptive behavior (Alternative Education Programs, 2008). Based on the structure and needs of this specific alternative setting, I will focus on the need for service learning to promote a constructivist setting in this environment.

Most of the students attending this alternative high school have struggled to make it in a traditional setting. Whatever the conflict at their previous schools, the one area where there is significant academic and social growth is in our service-learning program. Participation is entirely a student’s choice, and it is because of this choice, students feel ownership in the activities they complete.

Students who have experienced failure at school are often disillusioned by the idea of textbooks, teacher lectures, and homework. They cannot see the connections between school and life. It is through service learning that these students are able to connect the idea of learning to real world activities. Service learning has helped our students improve their attendance, attitudes, and self-efficacy. Daily students are questioning about the next activity or time when they can provide another service for their community. Their ideas are fascinating and inspiring—It is a constructivist teaching strategy that has helped engage students who are in danger of failing out of our school systems.

The Constructivist Nature of Service Learning
Constructivism is the philosophy that learning is built upon knowledge that preexists (Hoover, 1996). According to Hoover (1996), the two main ideas around constructed knowledge are that learners use what they know to create new understandings and that learning is active. This affects the notion of teaching because students need to be active participants in their learning environments. In service learning, students are actively participating in real-world activities as they determine how to solve problems and help their communities.

Hoover (1996) encourages teachers to ensure experiences are important to students and to encourage group interaction. In the social aspect, students are comparing their learning and new understandings to peers in their groups (Hoover, 1996). The link between this idea and service learning is key. In service learning activities, students determine authentic needs in their communities and determine how best to fit the needs that exist. Through this process, students are gathering and synthesizing information. They are debating with other students, calling community members, researching, and determining how their time can most effectively be used to help the need that exists.

Constructivism and the Eight Key Elements
Each of the eight keys of service learning are able to be placed into areas that match core beliefs of constructivism. Using information about Constructivism presented by Dr. Curtis Bonk, the following chart aligns major components of constructivism with the eight elements of service learning.

 * Learning Not Teaching - Academic Connections, Evaluation, Reflection

 * Learner Autonomy - Youth and Student voice, Authentic Needs Assessment, Meaningful Service

 * Learning is a Process - All Eight Elements

 * The Context in Which Learning takes Place - Academic Connections, Authentic Needs Assessment, Community Collaboration, Reflection

 * Invention and Trying out Ideas - Youth and Student Voice, Authentic Needs Assessment, Community Collaboration, Meaningful Service

 * Real World Situations - Meaningful Service, Community Collaboration

 * The Role of Experience in Learning - All Eight Elements

How Service Learning can Look
As many constructivist environments vary, the look and feel of service learning will vary depending on your educational and community setting. Needs in different communities vary, and service activities are based on these needs. Students’ interests vary, and service activities are based on these interests. Embracing an organized system and allowing it to evolve is the best way to start a successful service-learning program. Perhaps the most critical component is a staff that believes in allowing students to find ways to succeed beyond traditional book work, essays, and questions.

While it may be comforting to some, others may be intimidated by the open-ended structure of service learning. The key to implementing service learning is to understand that each situation is going to lead to different outcomes. If you are familiar with the key components of service learning and the idea that the teacher is a guide through the learning process, students will have the opportunity to excel in this process.

Reflection
The overall goal of this description is to demonstrate another way to actively engage students in the learning process. Service learning is a constructivist teaching strategy that has the potential to help students learn in a more meaningful way than textbook learning.

Resources
Alternative Education Programs (2008). Retrieved Nov. 14, 2008 from http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/alted/altedlinkpg.html.

Beers, K., Probst, R. E., & Rief, L. (2007). Adolescent literacy: turning promise into practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Bonk, C. J. Cognitive constructivism, social constructivism, and learning communities. PowerPoint Presentation.

Cress, C. M., Colier, P.J., Reitenauer, V. L. (2005). Learning through service. Stylus Publishing, Sterling, VA.

Eight Key Elements of Service Learning. (2008). http://doe.state.in.us/opd/srvlrn/what.html#key.

Hoover, W. A. (1996). The Practice implications of constructivism. SEDLetter Volume IX Number 3 August 1996. Accessed on 11/12/08 at http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedletter/v09n03/practice.html.

Kaye, C. B. (2004). The complete guide to service learning: Proven, practical ways to engage students in civic responsibility, academic curriculum, & social action. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing.

Return to The Practice of Learning Theories main page
Click the following link to return to the POLT main page:

The Practice of Learning Theories]

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Learning theories in practice/Help-seeking

Learners always seek help from people around them when what they encounter in learning are beyond the explanation of their current knowledge. Seeking help from others allows them to get targeted information exactly when they need it. Compared with other ways of learning, getting help from others is more convenient and less time-consuming. Learners hold different attitudes on help-seeking and show various behaviors in different learning environment or setting. Help-seeking behavior of learners is greatly influenced by learners’ characteristics and learning contexts. Also, help-seeking behavior in turn helps parents and teachers understand more about learners. The importance of help-seeking behavior cannot be ignored in learning process.

This chapter is created to provide a comprehensive understanding of help-seeking behavior in learning. The primary goal of it is to inspire parents, teachers and researchers to focus more attention on learners’ help-seeking or question-asking behavior in family and school learning environments. The second goal is to teach learners strategies of seeking help when they meet problems or difficulties in learning or studying. The third goal is to analyze the interactions involved in help-seeking behavior so that the relationship between help-seekers and help-providers is enhanced.

The chapter will include the following contents:
 * 1) Review the literature about the research on help-seeking in learning
 * 2) Understand the importance of the research on help-seeking behavior in learning
 * 3) Describe patterns of help-seeking in learning
 * 4) Explore reasons why learners need or attempt to seek help in learning
 * 5) Explain factors which influence learner’s seeking-help behavior
 * 6) Examine the future direction of the research on help-seeking behavior

Introduction: Stories
Let’s consider following stories before more is known about help-seeking in learning.

Story 1: Weiwei, my son, was 3 months when he turned to me for help. He could not grasp a toy that was far away from him then. Crying was his indication that he was in need of help because he subconsciously knew that reaching that toy was beyond his ability, but mom could give him a hand. Later, coupled with his physical growth was the increase of his questions. He was curious about everything around him, and the best way for him to acquire knowledge seems to ask questions and seek answers from me and other family members.

Story 2: In an English class of Bloomington elementary school, Jenny, a 9-year-old 3rd grader, was feeling frustrated when reading the grammar exercises on her English textbook. She did not know how to sort all these difficult parts out on her own. She was feeling helpless until the teacher came to her rescue. The teacher figured out from Jenny’s facial expression that she must encounter some troubles in her study. After half an hour, Jenny was smiling because she solved all her problems with the help of teacher.

Story 3: George is a 14-year-old student in Indianapolis high school. Like some at his age, he is becoming rebellious and seldom communicates with his parents, teachers, or peers. Every time when he is in trouble, whether in life or study, he hesitates to seek help from others because he thinks of help requesting is disgraceful. Even though he has this “self-respect”, he achieves low in the study.

Story 4: It is my first year in Indiana University. I had a good time in the first several months except for the unsatisfying score in the first statistics test. Thinking over the methods I used in learning statistics, I found out that I left some important but difficult problems unsolved. With limited abilities to solve them all, I knew that I needed help from the teacher and the assistant instructor in studying the next unit. Finally, I got a higher grade in the second statistics test. The success should be attributed to the help of the teacher and the AI.

Story 5: My friend Lei was sitting in her office at an accountant firm, being confused at what to do first because this was her first day in work after graduating from Peking University. Luckily, an experienced colleague was assigned to help her. Helping the newcomer was a tradition of the firm. It not only assists new colleagues to familiarize with their job but also guarantees the smooth management of the firm.

All above-mentioned stories are about asking help or help-seeking. Help-seeking, also question asking or requesting information, is a strategy utilized in a lifelong learning process. Nobody would live well without the help from others. When children begin to be curious about the world around them in infancy, they ask questions to those in their world, mostly, to their parents (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9rixsJ-VO0). When they are at school age and expand their “small kingdom” to schools, they need the help of others to progress in their learning, whether they are in kindergartens or in colleges. After graduation from universities, they have their first job and come to the new working site on the first day. They finally find out that the primary thing they should learn is to seek help from colleagues and supervisors. This seemingly simple and natural help-seeking behavior, however, is complex and intricate. It arouses the interest of researchers in sociology, psychology, education and other disciplines (B. Depaulo, A. Nadler, & J. Fisher, 1983). Researchers labeled help-seeking behavior as “an index of dependence and a degrading activity to be avoided” (Nelson-Le Gall, 1985) in their early studies, especially in those of socialization and personality development. Some theorists pointed out that help-seeking can be predicted by embarrassment and loss of self-esteem. Other researchers attributed help-seeking to the demonstration of one’s low-ability. But Nelson-Le Gall (1981) suggested a reconceptualized model of help-seeking. It changed the emphasis of study in help-seeking from “stigmatizing, self-threatening behavior” to “an effective alternative for coping with current difficulties.” He pointed out that help-seeking behavior can be predicted and explained by the use of “personal characteristics of the individual and situational characteristics of the achievement setting” in learning and achievement context. Later on, considerable research focused on the study of help-seeking behavior in learning.

This chapter will examine the importance of help-seeking behavior in learning, main patterns of help-seeking behavior, factors that influence help-seeking behavior in learning, and future direction of the research on help-seeking behavior.

A Social Constructivism Behavior
In social constructivism, humans construct meaning from current knowledge structures. Learning is an active process where learners should learn to discover principles, concepts, facts and answers for themselves. Each learner is viewed as a unique individual with unique needs and backgrounds. It is important that the learner is actively involved in the learning process to construct or co-construct knowledge so that they can retain their knowledge longer. When learners are not able to solve the problems they meet, they do not sit still and wait for the miraculous or natural appearance of the answers. Instead, they actively ask help from others who they think have more knowledge or higher levels than themselves. According to Eggen & Kauchak’s definition of constructivism, “Learners use their experiences to actively construct understandings that make sense to them, rather than have understandings delivered to them in already organized form” (1997, p. 59), seeking help, is a typical social constructivism behavior. As Piaget (1954) theorized, children encounter new information that does not fit into their existing schemata when they explore the world. Anomalies of this experience results in a state of “disequilibrium”: an unbalance in their mind that poses a problem. This state motivates children to seek help from those around them and then get information that can resolve their problems at hand. During the process, they assimilate incoming information from others into their existing way of thinking or accommodate their ways of thinking to new experiences. Once they find an adequate solution and the required information, they restore the state of equilibrium in their mind. Vygotsky (1978) further pointed out that children obtain help from the other people within their “zone of proximal development (ZPD)”. The ZPD is the difference between what children are already able to do on their own and “… (their) potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p.68). Through social interactions with others, especially with adults and more capable peers, children construct the knowledge of the world and seek out the information they are in need. This provides a particular advantage for them and allows them to learn more efficiently.

A Significant Cognitive Skill
Help-seeking behavior is particularly useful to children during cognitive development. Children are influenced directly and indirectly by their social environment in learning process. The ability of turning to adults or peers as sources to cope with the difficulties in life and study is considered one of the most important cognitive skills children can cultivate. Also, the studies of cognitive psychologists have demonstrated that help-seeking is basic to knowledge acquisition and learning. Unlike the information that children might obtain coincidentally from other sources, or information that other people offer or force to input when children are not prepared for it, children actively seek help and get answers or solutions exactly when they need it most. Fortunately, this is when they are open to the information when they are attempting to restore a state of equilibrium. And, the answers or information that children are seeking are what they are truly interested in. They may impress children most and help children memorize to the greatest extent.

An Important Self-regulated Strategy
Self-regulation refers to the use of processes that activate and sustain thoughts, behaviors, and affects in order to attain goals (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). In other words, it refers to taking charge of one’s own learning by coordinating thinking skills. Self-regulation consists of the development of a set of constructive behaviors that affect one's learning. These processes are planned and adapted to support the pursuit of personal goals in changing learning environments. When faced with a learning task, self-regulated learners typically do the following: (1) They begin by analyzing the task and interpreting task requirements in terms of their current knowledge and beliefs; (2) They set task-specific goals, which they use as a basis for selecting, adapting, and possibly inventing strategies that will help them accomplish their objectives; (3) After implementing strategies, they monitor their progress toward goals, thereby generating internal feedback about the success of their efforts; (4) They adjust their strategies and efforts based on their perception of ongoing progress; (5) They use motivational strategies to keep themselves on task when they become discouraged or encounter difficulties (Zimmerman, 1989). One specific characteristic of a self-regulated learner is that they know how to use others as a resource to cope with ambiguities and troubles in learning (Newman, 1991, 1994; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1988), that is, the ability to seek help. Learners unavoidably experience difficult situations in their life and study. When this occurs, they are able to initiate, direct, monitor, and adjust their own performance. Those possessing good self-regulatory skills not only know the importance of help from others (metacognition), but also approach others for clarification and direction so that learning can continue, that is, decide to seek help from others’ instructions (motivation), and implement strategies for engaging another person's help (Nelson Le-Gall, 1981; Newman, 1994). Such steps and processes are evidence that they are actively engaged in classroom activities and demonstrate an awareness of their own thinking. By seeking assistance at such times, learners solve not only their immediate difficulties but can also acquire skills and strategies that allow them to become independent.

Patterns of Help-seeking Behavior in Learning
Two forms of seeking help are distinguished: avoidant help-seeking and adaptive/strategic help-seeking. Avoidant help seeking refers to instances that a learner avoids asking for help even when he is aware of the need. The learner might choose to give up finding out the answer of a problem or guess an inappropriate answer rather than turn to others’ help. Then, they may put themselves in embarrassment and achieve little in learning. Compared with adaptive/strategic help seekers, avoidant help-seekers obviously have lower academic efficacy, less adaptability, more anxiety, and poorer performance in learning (Karabenick & Knapp, 1991; Nelson Le-Gall, 1981; Newman, 1994). In contrast, adaptive help seekers actively look for hints about the solution to their problem, or clarification of the ambiguity. They not only find the answers they requested but also develop the ability to overcome obstacles independently and eventually become autonomous learners. Strategic/adaptive learners are more motivated and more confident in learning. They have higher mastery approach achievement goal levels and academic performance (Ryan & Pintrich, 1997). According to Nelson-Le Gall (1985), adaptive help seeking has two forms: “instrumental” help and “executive” help. The former is relevant to clarifying methods and supporting future independent mastery (e.g., useful hints), while the latter is relevant to expediting immediate task completion (e.g., solutions).

Factors that Influence Help-seeking Behavior
Two main factors influence help-seeking behavior in learning: characteristics of learner and situational characteristics of learning setting.

Achievement Goal Orientations
Achievement goal orientations are important to understanding learners' help-seeking behaviors. They include mastery goal orientation (also called learning goals or task-involved goals) and performance goal orientation (also called relative ability and ego-involved goals). (Ames, 1992; Covington, 1992; Dweck, 1986; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). A mastery goal orientation refers to a desire to master knowledge in learning, including understanding the content on textbook, gaining an insightful perspective of a problem, or acquiring a new skill. Learning, in this sense, is an end in itself. Performance goal orientation concerns a desire to be evaluated positively or praised by others, especially by parents, teachers and peers. Others’ evaluation to learners is more important than learning itself.

Performance goal orientation is further classified into two: performance-approach goal orientation and performance-avoid goal orientation (Middleton, & Midgley, 1997). Whereas learners of the performance-approach goal orientation like to demonstrate their good ability, look smart, or outperform others, those with performance-avoid goal orientation focus on avoiding negative judgments of their competence and trying to avoid looking dumb or be outwitted by others.

A mastery goal orientation has been found to be related positively to adaptive help seeking (Butler & Neuman, 1995). Performance goal orientations have been associated with the avoidance of help seeking (Ryan & Pintrich 1997). Achievement goal orientation is highly correlated with learners’ academic self-efficacy. Learners with mastery goal orientation tend to be deeply engaged in learning activities and sustain intrinsic interest in mastering tasks and developing competence. They are motivated by challenges in learning. When faced with adversities, they often can persevere and strategically overcome difficulties. Learners with performance goal orientation, on the other hand, are more likely to be interested in getting good grades, displaying competence. They avoid challenges and obstacles in order to maintain their self-perception of ability relative to others (Middleton, & Midgley, 1997).

Academic Self-efficacy
Another characteristic of learners that has been shown to be related to help-seeking behavior is their academic self-efficacy, which refers to learners' evaluation of their capabilities to complete their academic task successfully (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Consistent with Bandura’s self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997), academically self-efficacious learners are more confident in their abilities. They do not worry the negative feedback from help givers and are more likely to secure necessary help. In contrast, learners with low academic self-efficacy tend to believe that the potential help givers will look down upon them if they ask help, and, therefore, they are reluctant to ask for help. In effect, the very learners who need help the most seek it the least.

Attitudes about Help-seeking
Attitudes refer to perceived threat and benefits associated with help seeking in learning. They influence behavioral intentions and, in turn, actual behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Butler (1998) identified three general concerns learners have about help-seeking: (1) autonomy; (2) ability; and (3) expedient concerns. Autonomy concerns refer to the concerns of learners about their self-esteem and self-reliance in seeking assistance. Learners of autonomy concerns have the expectation to complete work on their own rather than the desire to rely on help from someone else. Ability concerns refer to the concerns of learners about their own abilities or capabilities to solve the problems. They place a high value on their own abilities and think that they will look dumb if they ask for help. Expedient concerns refer to the concerns of learners about efficiency of the solution. They believe that turning to others for solving difficulties will not be as effective as relying on their own if the help givers are not competent, the helper is too difficult or famous to contact, or help-seeking will waste a lot of time. Because of these three concerns, learners may hesitate to seek help from others. On the contrary, without these preoccupations before asking for assistance, learners would feel comfortable in obtaining help.

Affective Experiences
Affective experiences have been found to be important to understanding students' motivation and engagement (Roeser, Eccles, & Strobel, 1998), and they also play a role in learners' help-seeking behavior. Learners' affective experiences may predispose them to feeling positively or negatively about help seeking and thus influence their behavior. Those who have experienced good communication with helpers or achieved their goals by asking for help will seek help actively next time when they are in trouble. The positive affective experience will, in turn, greatly enhance their learning. On the other hand, learners who get ineffective results from help-seeking behavior are unlikely to ask for assistance when they know the problems are beyond their capabilities. The negative affective experience, in the end, inhibits learners from seeking help, the more convenient way to solve problems.

Characteristics of Helpers
Help-seeking is not a sole behavior of help-seekers. It needs the cooperation of helpers or help givers. At home, helpers are always parents; and helpers are teachers and peers mainly in classroom settings. Characteristics of help givers play a key role in the process of seeking help.

Helpers’ Relationship with Help- seekers
Positive social relations between help seekers and help givers increase the likelihood that persons who are in need of help ask for assistance. There are different aspects of helpers’ support, including a concern with the help-seekers both as a learner (academic support) and as a person (socioemotional support) (Turner et al., 2002).

Helpers’ Competence
When help-seekers turn to others for help, they presuppose that helpers have more knowledge and higher capabilities than themselves. And seeking help aims to solve the problems that help-seekers encounter. Competent helpers find answers quickly and convince those who turn to them. However, the incompetence of help givers will not only make help-seekers disappointed, but also influence learners’ future help-seeking behavior (van der Meij, 1988).

Helpers’ Attitudes about Help-seeking
Obviously, helpers’ attitudes about help-seeking determine whether they prefer to offer their help to help-seekers or not (Butler, 1998). Help-seekers often feel frustrated when helpers are indifferent to the questions they have. Children may not ask questions any more at home after their mothers laugh at their questions or neglect their requesting information. However, students are encouraged to ask more questions when their teachers are patient to explain answers.

Social Climate of Learning Setting
Help seeking behavior combines aspects of cognitive and social engagement. It is both a learning strategy and a social interaction with others. Learners' help-seeking behavior is closely related to social climate of the learning setting. Settings characterized as caring, supportive, and friendly are likely to make learners feel more comfortable while they are interacting with the helpers. In an environment in which learners feel inferior or incompetent, they may be less likely to feel the need to ask for help (Ryan & Pintrich, 1998). In effect, a positive social environment wherein learners feel a sense of belongingness is critical to the use and ultimate impact of help seeking.

Research on Characteristics of Learners
Though there are a large amount of studies on characteristics of learners in help-seeking behavior as mentioned above, other aspects of learners need to be explored more in the future, such as age and gender of learners. The research of Newman and Goldin (1990) examined characteristics related to help-seeking for 177 children in grades 3, 5, and 7 and found age and gender differences. Their results are helpful for understanding help-seeking behavior from development perspective.

Research on Help-seeking in Other Learning Setting
Most previous research on help-seeking was targeted to learners in primary schools. Researchers need to explore more in other classrooms such as in preschools, high schools and colleges. And numerous previous studies focused on math classes (Ryan & Pintrich, 1997; Tuner et al., 2002). Researchers can analyze help-seeking behavior classroom in other subjects, such as, language, biology or geography. Family, as another important place for learners to seek help, was seldom examined in previous studies. Examination of help-seeking behavior in these learning settings will provide us a complete description of help-seeking behavior.

Research on Help-giving
Related to help-seeking, help-giving is another important field to explore. The types of help-giving or the persons who are engaged in helping are crucial to understand help-seeking. Examining teachers or peer’s help giving will provide a new perspective to study instruction in education. Webb (2003) investigated the help-giving in collaborative peer learning environment.

Research on Help-seeking in Different Cultures
Compared with abundant research on help-seeking behavior in American schools, the research on help-seeking behavior in other cultures was few (Nelson, & Jones, 1990). Culture, as an important influence on learning, would impact greatly help-seeking behavior. Learners may display various help-seeking behaviors in different cultural contexts.

Conclusion
Though a seemingly simple behavior in leaning, help-seeking reflects Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives on learning, it embodies Bandura’s social cognitive theory as well. The past decade witnessed the increased studies on help-seeking behavior. It is not only because help-seeking was viewed as active engagement in learning, but also because its significance in understanding social constructivism, cognitive development and self-regulatory strategies. Many factors are related to help seeking behavior in learning, mainly, characteristics of learner and social interaction in learning environment. The elaboration of these factors is the combination of concepts in educational psychology and various learning theories. It is believed that help-seeking can be studied from different perspectives, such as from other cultures and other learning environments. Future research on help-seeking will contribute more to understanding problems in development, learning and cognition.


text:
The Practice of Learning Theories/How can we end the POLT?

Ending the POLT is Not so Easy!
Can a book like the POLT ever be ended? Can we truly stop applying learning theories? Can we think of all the ways in which learning theories can be applied today in December 2007 and have no more ideas in 2008 or 2009 or 2015 later on? Certainly not! Scholars and practitioners will continually dream up new learning theories and instructional design models. There is no doubt that we will!!! At the same time, teachers, trainers, and other educators will come up with innovative and adventurous ways to apply them. As a result, if people continue to edit, add to, or modify this book, it will never end. The POLT will live on and on and on.

We are ALL practitioners of learning theories. We practice them with our students, with our children, with our friends, with our relatives, and with all others we encounter. We apply learning theories in both formal and informal settings on a daily, if not minute-to-minute, basis. Stop for a second and record these and then add them to this book. Your experiences and insights in the application of learning theories is always going to be welcome here!

As was mentioned in the introduction to the POLT, this book sprang forth from graduate learning theories and instructional design courses taught by Dr. Mimi Lee at the University of Houston and Dr. Curt Bonk at Indiana University. We hope you have enjoyed reading different sections of this book. We welcome others to add to it in unique ways; especially, college and university classes related to learning theories and instructional design. We realize that there are dozens, if not hundreds, of additional perspectives that need to be added to this book. We welcome yours.

We look forward to coming back in a month, a year, or perhaps even a decade and seeing the insightful as well as the mysterious ways in which learning theories and instructional design models can be applied in real world settings on this planet, be they in religious organizations, museums, educational institutions, corporate training settings, or even in political situations. That is what makes learning theories so much fun to use and reflect on. We all are learners and we all push on with our own unique strengths and interests to apply learning theories.

As a final note, it will also be important to know how this book is being used. If you have a unique application or idea related to this book, please let us know about it. We always love to hear stories of how free and open access resources such as wikibooks are used for education around the globe as well as ideas for new wikibooks on similar topics or other collaboration ideas. If you have a unique or interesting story (or any story for that matter), Dr. Bonk can be contacted at cjbonk@indiana.edu. As indicated, ending the "The Practice of Learning Theories" (i.e., the POLT) is never easy, so consider this the end of this sentence, not the end of the opportunities that await each of us in applying learning theories.


text:
Learning theories in practice/Imaginary snapshots

Imaginary Snapshots By Valerie Lawhorn

In my process as a writer, I use visual imagery to construct characters and the world around them. After characters have identities, the story begins to move. I record the character interactions and the entire landscapes in my head. It exists as more than what paper can hold and faster than I can type. While training to become an English teacher, I was introduced to use visual aids to stimulate writing. I was unaware of a theory connected with how effective this was or how it is learned. Using visuals create more than a way to gain interest. This exploration will encourage a connection between the importance of teaching creative writing with visual aids and the process of how it occurs in the mind. This paper explores the relationship of my experience as a writer and documented writing practices of published writers in parallel to Dual Coding Theory (DCT). The roots of Dual Coding Theory stem from cognitivism and how information is processed. Allan Paivio developed the dual-coding theory, which suggests nonverbal and verbal information is processed in separate, yet specific compartments of the human brain (Paivio, 1971). The mental compartments are known as the verbal and nonverbal mental coding systems. The codes interact with one another when information activates both sectors (Paivio, 1971). The verbal coding system is comprised of linguistics: writing and speech (Paivio, 1971). The nonverbal coding system is also known as mental imagery as defined by Sadoski and Paivio (2001) as “the analysis of external scenes and generation of internal mental images” (p.43). It is comprised of sensory memories: visual, sounds, feel, taste, and smell. When the verbal and mental coding system interact, it is more valuable to memory and comprehension (Paivio, 1971). Sadoski (2001) uses the word “mental elaboration” to describe “the increased activation of both codes by concrete language” (p.264). For example, for a child to learn the concept of what a cat is, to provide a picture of what a cat looks like may not only help the child remember, but strengthen the understanding of cat as an animal being. For the already educated subject, cat is a concrete word and has the ability to provide both nonverbal and verbal information. Unlike other cognitive theories, Dual Coding Theory provides an explanation for both reading and writing (Sadoski & Paivio, 2001).

Figure 1. The two mental coding systems of Dual Coding Theory as two separate entities that interact (Paivio, 1971).

Vincent (2007) adds to DCT stating, “[T]here is plenty of evidence that, mentally [writers] may well be using multiple codes” (p.143). According to DCT, we take snapshots of the world using mental imagery (Sadoski & Paivio, 2001). Writers often hone this ability, similar to a catalogue, in memories of people and places. Vincent (2007) states, “Through experience, we develop the ability to understand and use language and remarkable ability to manipulate and transform the world around us mentally using a non-verbal code of images” (p.143). A writer looks through the lens to capture images on paper. These are often mundane, everyday moments, moments that most people would overlook, but to a writer, it is something to magnify.

Murray (1978) cites authors as using mental imagery in two distinct ways, images as “static,” or as “a moving picture in the writer’s mind” (p.379). William Faulkner is cited to have said, “It begins with a character, usually, and once he stands on his feet and begins to move, all I do is trot along behind him with a paper and pencil trying to keep up long enough to put down what he says and does” (as cited in as cited in Murray, 1978, p. 379). I felt a personal connection with his description. This is my experience as a writer, only written better. Some authors identify the power of imagery to support the story they are trying to convey. Gabriel García Márquez uses imagery to send readers into his stories. He begins with a static image but it quickly transforms and drives his story. For instance, Gabriel Garcia Márquez is quoted as stating he begins his works with “[a] completely visual image” (as cited in Murray, 1978, p. 379). In his short story, The Handsomest Drowned Man in the World,” Márquez (1995) provides the reader with the image of a “dark and slinky bulge approaching,” which instantly set up the central idea of the story to discover what/who this bulge/man is (p.665).

As a reader, I get a mental picture from the words on the page; and as a writer, I try to recreate that experience for an audience. I encourage students to use all the senses to describe what is occurring in an important scene. For example, in this passage by J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, wrote this passage about Harry’s finding his wand from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone: Harry took the wand. He felt a sudden warmth in his fingers. He raised the wand above his head, brought it swishing down through the dusty air and a stream of red and gold sparks shot from the end like a firework, throwing dancing spots of light on to the walls (p. 85).

Using the senses help the reader to identify with the action as they are experiencing the action as well. Harry and the audience share the experience of feeling “warmth,” “hearing “swishing,” and seeing “red and gold sparks” and “dancing spots of light.” Using DCT sensory details add to the audience connection by using both verbal and nonverbal mental processing codes (Sadoski & Paivio, 2001). It is the three-dimensional reading involvement that increases reading abilities to replicate sensory details in a writing context. Also, the word choice of concrete words, or words that suggest mental imagery engages readers and (Goetz, Sadoski, Stricker, White, & Wang, 2007) I use the writing process derived from Janet Emig’s writing process of brainstorming, drafting, revising, editing, and submitting, which I use to discuss the teaching process. The introduction of the topic, or objective, should be learned before the imagery can be functional in instruction (Sadoski & Paivio, 2001). For instance, understanding of the characteristics of setting and characters should be understood before forging a connection between the concepts and the image. In one example of creative writing instruction, learners are given an image to study and extract a setting. It is encouraged by Sadoski and Paivio (2001) that “specific instructions to visualize” are given to learners for the process to be utilized (p.195).

Figure 2. A sample photograph of countryside in Spain (Lawhorn, 2001).

In this example, writers are encouraged to focus on a portion of the image, or the image in its entirety. The setting should be established primarily through specific details using description words. Brainstorming ideas over setting could include the following characteristics: geographical location, landscape, housing, time period, and social environment (Harmon & Holman, 2000). Writers should be prompted to begin at the strength of what the image is trying to convey. In this photograph the strength lies in the geographical location and landscape (e.g., The winding road lead away from town and brought in strangers). Before writers work on their own, I often have writers brainstorm an example image in a group dynamic by listing descriptive words captured by the image. After brainstorming the setting character development can begin. Writers should design characters to subsist within the setting. This approach can be modified with whatever visual stimulus is available: postcards of art and photographs, old catalogues like the Sears Roebuck catalogue (LeNoir, 2003). Another idea would be to use wordless picture books to write a picture book. Wordless books illustrate a story and provide a subjective view to the individual. Students can use the images to describe what is occurring or can isolate a frame to begin the writing process if the desired effect is not to constrict writer. Harmon & Holman (2000) support DCT and the ability of visuals to have “qualities found in images are particularity, concreteness, and an appeal to sensuous experience or memory—an appeal that seems to work best through specifically visual images” (p.263). LeNoir (2003) suggested using everyday signs to provoke creative thought. This is more of a writing exercise and not to write a story.

Figure 3. Weston (1937) photograph of Mojave Desert. This is an example of a thought provoking image.

In another example of creative writing instruction, learners are given images to study and extract characters. Brainstorming ideas over what each character thinks, feels, says, and does, as well as the physical appearance of the character (Lostracco & Wilkerson, 1992). Sketching complete characters will suggest what setting will complement them and writers can match these characters to images of settings. This example resembles what I do as a writer, but in my opinion it can overwhelm inexperienced writers to create characters first. Sometimes a setting is less pressure. Also, young writers tend to revert back to childhood stories like fairy tales, something that resembles a fantasy setting.

Figure 4. Cameron (ca.1865-1866) photograph of Mrs. Herbert Duckworth as Julia Jackson. Writers can make up a story of who this woman is. The physical appearance is provided so emphasize what the characters thinks, feels, says, and does.

These examples are to encourage better quality and stronger connections to writings, and to simulate how authors use imagery to write stories. It is not original in idea, rather an illustration of how visuals are supported by theory of Dual Coding. By reflecting on my writing practices, it allows me to craft an approach to teach creative writing, because I believe mental imagery inspires writing. My stories come from my imaginary snapshots. Works cited

Harmon, W., & Holman, H. C. (2000). A Handbook to Literature (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Holcomb, P. J, Kounios, J., & Anderson, J.E. (1999). Dual-Coding, context-availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: An electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 721-742. http://neurocog.psy.tufts.edu/papers/pdfs/DualCoding.pdf. Goetz, E. T., Sadoski, M., Stricker, A., White, T., & Wang, Z. (2007). The role of imagery in the production of written definitions. Reading Psychology, 28, 241-256. Goetz, E.T, Kealy, W. A, Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (1997). Concreteness and imagery effects in the written composition of definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 518-526. Keenan, J.M, & Zimler, J. (1983) Imagery in the congenitally blind:  how visual are visual images? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9(2), 269-282. Hansen, C. C, & Zambo, D. (2005). Piaget, meet Lilly: Understanding child development through picture book characters. Early Education Journal, 33(1), 39-45. Kearsley, G (2007). Dual Coding Theory. Explorations in Learning & Instruction: The Theory Into Practice Database. http://tip.psychology.org/paivio.html. LeNoir, D. W. (2003). “There’s Nothing to Eat!” A half-dozen ways to find writing ideas. English Journal, 92(5), 25-29. Lostracco, J., & Wilkerson, G. (1992). Analyzing Short Stories (2nd Ed.). Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Márquez, G. G., (1995). The Handsomest Drowned Man in the World. Cassill, R. V., The Norton Anthology of Short Fiction (5th ed.), pp. 665-670. New York: Norton. Murray, D. M. (1978). Write before writing. College Composition and Communication, 29 (4), 375-381. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Reed, S. K. (2006). Cognitive architectures for multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 4 (2), 87-98. Rowling, J.K (1997). Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York: Scholastic. Sadoski, M. & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and Text: A Dual Coding Theory of Reading and Writing. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Sadoski, M. (1998). Mental imagery in reading: A sampler of some significant studies. Reading Online. Available online: http://www.readingonline.org/research/Sadoski.html. Sadoski, M. (2001). Resolving the effects of concreteness on interest, comprehension, and learning important ideas from text. Educational Psychology Review, 13(13), 263-281. Sipe, L. R. (1998). How Picture books work: A Semiotically Frame Theory of Text-Picture Relationships. Children’s Literature in Education, 29(2), 97-108. Vincent, J. (2007). Writing and coding: assisting writers to cross the modes. Language and Education, 21(2), 141-157. Verkiri, I. (2002). What is the learning value of graphical displays in learning? Educational psychology Review, 14(3), 261-312.


text:
Learning theories in practice/Constructivist classrooms

Individual Knowledge and Negotiated Meanings: A Constructivist Classroom”

When a teacher says their classroom is constructivist, an image of students working on projects in small groups instantly appears. Constructivism is often linked with student centered, active learning. But what does this really mean? Are all of these really examples of constructivist theory in practice? The purpose of this chapter is to engage educators in thoughtful discussion and reflection on some of the issues faced when attempting to structure classroom practices using constructivist learning theories. My goal for the chapter is that it will provide educators with a better understanding of constructivist theory, why constructivist theories are relevant in today’s classrooms and how competing forces are making it difficult for educators attempting to establish constructivist classrooms. Ultimately, I am hoping that educators who read this chapter will come away with a renewed sense of the importance and relevance of constructivist theories and how they are being applied in the classroom.

What is Constructivist Theory?
''At a recent workshop our task was to examine how well we, as teachers, understood and were able to teach the 2nd grade social studies TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills): which states “The student is expected to: identify characteristics of good citizenship such as a belief in justice, truth, equality, and responsibility for the common good.” The discussion became quite heated in the group that was trying to define “justice.” The group was having a hard time with the definition because the two elementary school teachers had a different definition than the college level teacher. The issue was whether or not elementary school children should have the same expectation of justice as adults. Without a common definition of the word we were never able to move on to the question of how to teach this to 2nd graders. However, over the course of the discussion we all considered and eventually articulated our own personal definitions.''

Constructivism is a theory of learning in which the student uses prior understandings in concert with current experiences to construct, elaborate or restructure their knowledge. The teacher’s role is to support that active process through exploration and dialogue (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996, and Windschitl, 2002). One of the most difficult epistemological underpinnings of constructivism for educators to embrace is that there are no universal truths and that meaning is negotiated (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996, and Windschitl, 2002). While constructivism is often talked about and referenced with teaching ideas like student-centered learning, constructivism by its very nature is not compatible with standardized curriculum and more objective forms for knowing. Windschitl (1999) argues that constructivism is a cultural system and not just a set of strategies, which has the potential to create learners who are able to make sense of the world.

Constructivism is a response to the perceived lack of recognition by behaviorist and cognitive learning theorists of the unique learning characteristics of individuals and of the social nature of learning (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996, and Windschitl, 2002). Jean Piaget is widely recognized as the founding father of Constructivism with his notion that learning is individually constructed however this idea was not unique to Piaget, many other philosophers have written on the same idea as far back as the18th century, Vico, and more recently Dewey, Rousseau, Whitehead, Kuhn, Wittgenstein and Rorty (Phillips, 1995 and Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). What has emerged in the constructivist literature is a bifurcation into two camps the individual cognitive constructivists (sometimes referred to as psychological constructivism) and the social constructivists (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Windschitl, 1999, 2002 and Richardson, 2003). The individual cognitive constructivists focus on the individual’s reaction to the experience and to the process through which understandings are formed. Dewey and Piaget describe a similar process by which the individual encounters a situation where they are uncomfortable and unable to easily explain the situation. New knowledge is then constructed as the individual must restructure their knowledge in order to accommodate the new information (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). Von Glaserfeld’s theory of radical constructivism similarly considers the individual’s response as the primary force for knowledge building; he feels that considering the social aspects of learning an inappropriate leap (von Glasersfeld, 2000). Conversely, social constructivism places the emphasis on the interaction with others; knowledge is seen entirely as a negotiated human construct (Richardson, 2003 and Windschitl, 2002). In direct contrast to the radical constructivists, social constructivist do not believe that how one is situated in the world can be separated and not considered in the process of knowledge making (Lewin, 2000). Vygotsky is largely seen as the pioneer in this branch with his focus on language; Dewey has also contributed with his description of schools as communities (Phillips & Soltis, 2004, and Popkewitz, 1998). Prawat (2000) does an admirable job of describing the evolution of Dewey’s thinking as he develops the idea of the classroom as social units in which students are explore ideas and thus building their own knowledge.

Why is Constructivism Important?
''At the start of the 2006-2007 school year Louisiana and the Gulf Coast was devastated by Hurricane Katrina. The school district in which I taught saw a wave of new students enrolling. The 6th grade social studies curriculum in the two states is very different so those students missed out on the content they would have otherwise received, and did not have the prior knowledge we expected them to have. By the same token teachers are traveling into new cultural settings. In the last school I taught in the 7th grade team leader for Texas History got her certification in Louisiana, she never received any formal education in the subject in which she now taught. On a wider scale a school I was recently in advertised that it had students enrolled from over 100 different countries. Imagine the range of experiences that these students and teachers could potential bring into the classroom.''

In the early 20th century when Lev Vygotsky and John Dewey were writing, the world was experiencing a period of intense change. Following the Progressive Era and the end of World Wars I and II, the political, economical, and cultural systems were subjects of attention and public debate. Part of that discussion was a reconsideration of what it meant to be a modern citizen. Vygotsky, Dewey and more recently Fleury (1998) and Lewin (2000) wrote of the need to educate for participatory democracy, which has been identified as a primary benefit of constructivist teaching (Popkewitz, 1998). Through their use of knowledge as a social construct a notion of knowledge as practical emerges and seeks to end a dualistic understanding of a separate government that acts upon its citizens. Citizens through the use of their practical knowledge concerning their communities are thus able to become active within the government and work for change (Popkewitz, 1998).

More recently an idea of cultural constructivism is being discussed, educators are recognizing that both teachers and students are more mobile and that increasingly both are asked to teach and learn in situations that are very different culturally than those in which they are most familiar. This cross-cultural teaching creates problems when choosing content, school systems, assessment, classroom communication, and teaching methods. Using constructivist theory as the basis for classroom instruction in these multi-cultural settings allows teachers to teach with both the individual and their values and past experiences in mind (Hutchinson, 2006)

Critical constructivists add another layer to the belief that knowledge is socially constructed. Most closely connected with the social studies content area it is based on the comparison between logical positivism and what is sometimes described as traditional social studies. When content knowledge is defined as a series of objective facts, knowledge is static and because competing explanations are not acceptable history is presented from a single perspective meant to explain all individual experiences. Critical constructivists call on students to understand the power structures and interests that shape the knowledge that is presented as facts in schools. Content knowledge is then understood to have multiple perspectives and is constructed by humans (Fleury, 2001).

The primary concern of educational theory is how students create knowledge. Schools and teachers in turn demonstrate what type of knowledge is important through the use of instructional strategies and content. Education is at its most basic level about teaching what is important. When we teach with strict hierarchies and factual bodies of knowledge, we limit student’s abilities to envision alternatives and to see themselves as agents of change. This has not only political but also economic and social consequences in that it limits the potential for new research, discovery and understanding. Inventors need the ability to experiment and explore in the process of finding a new discovery, constructivism affords them that opportunity (Larochelle, 2000).

What are the Issues for Classroom Educators?
General issues with theory and instructional models: Constructivism is an educational theory, an idea about how students will learn best. It does not provide even general guidelines about how it should be practiced in the classroom. It is the job of instructional theorists to take that notion of how students learn and interpret it into a theory of instruction. Classroom teachers then take that instructional theory and implement it in their classroom where there is another level of interpretation as teachers must find a practical application that fits the needs of their specific classrooms. These three levels of interpretations and analysis are rarely done in consultation with the others. Therein lies the disconnect (Windschitl, 1999). Educational theory is brought to life in the classroom but it is rare for teachers to have specific knowledge of education theory and to make thoughtful, informed decisions based on those establish theories. The result is that teachers will implement theories but in incomplete, or safe ways and they lack the knowledge to make informed critical decisions about strategies (Jonassen, 2006 and Windschitl, 2002). Without this understanding of theory and purpose, new instructional strategies have the appearance of “just another new idea,” they appear unrelated and not grounded in any overarching goal. It is not surprising that parents also get concerned with the application of what appears to be experimental practices (Windschitl, 2002).

Theorists and instructional designers are fond of presenting learning as if it happens one way for all; this is however, not the case. Teachers have been saying for some time that students are unique, they learn differently in different situations and that teachers need to use a variety of theories and strategies dependent on the content and classroom climate (Jonassen, 2006 and Richardson, 2003). What is need are more instructional models that have been tested in practice building that connection between instructional designer and classroom teacher (von Glasersfeld, 2000). Another related issue is the current climate of control by policymakers and the standards movement (Windschitl, 2002). Given that learning is not a scripted process that can be standardized, policy makers will need to relax their control and allow teachers to make curriculum and instruction decision based on community needs. Education is a conservative act making this relaxing of control a difficult process (Fluery, 1998).

Changing role of teacher and student
''During a class discussion with sixth graders I asked them to describe what it means to protest and each one gave me a different definition. One said that it means to shout and wave signs, another said it means to be angry, another said you get arrested, someone else added that it means you want to fix something, one student offered Martin Luther King as an example and finally a student described as a peaceful march. We talked about how all of these can be true; it depends on your viewpoint.''

Duffy & Cunningham (1996) describe learning and knowledge as a rhizome, meaning that like a ginger plant or many types of grasses the root shoots off in many directions creating a complex structure of divergences and connections. The rhizome is so complex that it cannot be easily diagrammed or understood; the rhizome can only be appreciated from the current view point. This is a very different understanding of learning and knowledge for most educators and it will require them to think very different about their teaching. Teachers can no longer see themselves in the typical culturally constructed role of the all knowing expert. Teachers will instead need to embrace the position of mediator, helping student describe what they are experiencing without demanding one particular explanation (Windschitl, 1999 and 2002).

Another significant problem for teachers is their ability to assess student knowledge. Teachers need an in depth understanding of the content area along with a large vocabulary so that they can communicate with students about their knowledge constructs (Duffy, 1996; Richardson, 2003; and Windschitl, 2002). Larochelle (2000) feels that teachers are overly concerned with a students “knowledge of”, or gaps in factual content, at the expense of “knowledge that”, or the complexity of ideas. The later is certainly more difficult to assess given the frequent lack of descriptive language on the part of both the teacher and the student. This type of monitoring, which checks for a good level of reasoning, requires that the teacher and student have close ties in order to build sufficient language skills to communicate their knowledge constructs (Larochelle, 2000 and Windschitl, 2002).

Some ideas for instruction
''Recently I had the opportunity to observe in a 7th grade Language Arts classroom. The teacher had the desks arranged in groups of three and the students were working on an individual writing assignment, over the course of the class period the students were sharing their work and providing suggestions to each other. The purpose of these “consultations” was for the students to improve their writing and to practice giving and receiving feedback. On my next visit the students had completed reading a short story and were in their table groups working to complete a group story outline. They were discussing their understanding of the story plot and negotiating the language for the plot summary. On both days the teacher was moving around the room and providing assistance only if asked.''

Beyond the possible issues with implementation there are many instructional methods that offer themselves as constructivist, but it can be very difficult to determine which strategies and practices truly embody constructivist theory. Windschitl, (2002) suggests that activities be thought as having either strong or weak ties to constructivist theories. It is easy to say that in constructivist classrooms students construct their own knowledge but even in the most traditional of teaching activities not associated with constructivism, the direct lecture, students are building some type of knowledge. So yes, students must always be constructing their own knowledge, but the classroom culture must one where knowledge is not defined by a set of objective facts (Windschitl, 2002).

One example of how teaching practices can look constructivist but not support the idea that knowledge is subject can be found in a comparison of constructivism and cooperative learning. Both have mixed teams but cooperative learning also allows for the practice and rehearsal of information, constructivism which is marked by student inquiry does not. For example, a teacher can arrange students into groups and allow them to research and create a representation of a content related concept, this could be considered both constructivist and cooperative learning. However, if the teacher used the same groups to have students quiz each other over vocabulary terms or review for a test that could be considered cooperative learning but not constructivist (Vermette & Foote, 2001).

With constructivism’s foundation in experience and the social nature of schools another issue concerns student’s ability to work in groups. Students may not always be interested in group work and a considerable about of time may need to be spent helping students develop collaborative skills. The benefit for students can be an increased sense of themselves as intellectuals and an understanding of the influences of others on their knowledge (Windschitl, 2002). While large groups have the benefits of increased opportunities for discourse and influence they can be problematic due to varying levels of participation which guarantees different knowledge constructs. Nuthall (2002) finds that it is best to have small groups engaged in common activities. The literature contains a wide base of the support for long-term project-based curriculum (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996 and Windschitl 1999).

Constructivism like other educational theories cannot be simply reduced into a set of classroom practices. Constructivism requires a new set of assumptions about what our classrooms should look like and who creates the curriculum content. Constructivism has the potential to empower our students into active citizenship. In order for constructivist theory to research its full potential teachers must become better educated and more thoughtful about the classroom strategies they employ.