Applying Standards Based Constructivism:
A Two-Step Guide for Motivating Students
Trowbridge, Brybee and Powell's 5E Model

The 5E is a powerful and attractive instructional model and its steps help teachers make decisions as the learning moves forward. We think that two-step does this at least equally well and calls for more professional decision-making and, allows more freedom.

DESCRIPTION

Designed primarily by science educators for secondary science teaching, the 5E model has a classic constructivist structure. As described in their 2000 text, Trowbridge, Tybee and Powell envision a five phase model in which learners begin to investigate phenomenon and eventually complete the learning cycle by creating conceptions, theories and generalizations based on their work...

The five phases, whose titles capture the essence of the students’ actions, are listed as follows:

In this model, each phase sees the students doing particular types of thinking. In ENGAGEMENT, for example, they ask questions and establish prior knowledge. In EXPLORATION, they form predictions or record observations, while suspending a finalized meaning. In EXPLANATION, they question others interpretations and findings and listen critically to teachers’ comments. In ELABORATION, they begin to check for understanding and draw conclusions. Finally, in EVALUATION, they demonstrate their new (completed) understanding of the phenomenon at hand.

In this model, the teacher serves as a guide, leading the students through each of the progressive steps, making sure that relevant data is deal with.

Notably, teachers are cautioned against doing several traditional behaviors as the learning progresses throughout a unit (or a lesson). These include such standards as (l) explaining concepts, (2) stating conclusions, (3) telling students when they are wrong, (4) ignoring poorly formed answers, and (5) providing definitions. For the most part, we are pleased with the indirect nature of these suggestions, as they tend to force the thinking (and judging) to the learners themselves .However, this model suggests that these behaviors are appropriate in certain phases and not others. Followed tightly, this model does make learners into investigators, doing what scientists do, and proving themselves as scientists do. But strict attention must be paid to the sequence and the phase that the class is working on at any one time.

It is a good model and clearly constructivist in nature.

COMPARISON

At first glance, many people might see the 5E Model as synonymous with the two-step model, which does two things: it makes us proud to be so aligned with a famous and accepted model and yet it diminishes some of the uniqueness of the two-step model.

Suffice to say that comparisons reveal many similarities, including the following:

(l) students really make their own knowledge, not replicate the teacher (or textbook’s) version ;

(2) the teacher is facilitator, guiding through suggestions, questions, and encouragements;

(3) the students are expected to think critically throughout the learning process, aiming for Bloom levels of analysis and synthesis and ending up with understanding, not just recall.

(4) the teacher is also the key to provoking reflection in this model, creating opportunities for students to examine their own thinkings and their own meanings.

However, there are several differences between the 5E and the two-step models that should be noted:

(l) The five phases of 5E are not directly translatable into the 2 phases of the Flynn. While much of the work of the first two phases is reflected in the exploratory phase of the “two-step”, the “two-step” is less tightly structured and more free-form. The goal of exploratory is to get the students to generate their own interests and questions into a topic and to help them access and examine their relevant prior knowledge. It is done in a much more open ended way and actual may delve into some hypothesizing that 5E saves for Elaboration. It appears that the structured approach of 5E does channel thinking but may not allow the “teachable moments’ or ‘in depth extensions” that the “two-step” does.

(2) In the evaluation phase of 5E, students evaluate what they’ve learned and explore its meanings. In the “two-step”, the discovery phase is all about completing the work that has been created and is a task-driven (and standards-based) activity. Meaning comes from the solving of the problem or the creating of the product, and so both process AND product need to be evaluated.

Moreover, the simplicity of the “two-step” model is evident in the discovery phase. Once the task has been accepted and internalized (owned) by learners, they get to work and the teacher facilitates their efforts. There are fewer expected interventions than are required by the more structured approach of 5E. In the “two-step”, the teacher intervenes as need be, depending on reality in front of him or her. Required steps may be ignored or modified in a way that doesn’t seem as consistent with the 5E. Again, 5E flows from the “scientific method” and is closely aligned with that historic pattern: The “two-step” is a generic structure of creating interest in a topic and helping students conduct meaningful investigations into it.

In truth, the 5E is a powerful and attractive instructional model and its steps help teachers make decisions as the learning moves forward. We think that two-step does this at least equally well and calls for more professional decision-making and, allows more freedom.