Understanding and Implementing Constructivist Strategies
Module Five

Hal Robertson - Course Designer
hfr@northnet.org

Module 5 - EXTEND AND REFINE KNOWLEDGE - INTRODUCTION:

In this module we will focus on two points from “Becoming a Constructivist Teacher”.

First, point 3 – When framing tasks, constructivist teachers use cognitive terminology such as “classify,” “analyze,” “predict,” and “create.”
Second, point 2 - Constructivist teachers use raw data and primary sources, along with manipulative, interactive, and physical materials.

PROCESS:

During this module would you please:

a) Complete the reflective questions.
b) Reread the 3rd and 2nd points in chapter 9 “Becoming a Constructivist Teacher” from In Search of Understanding by Brooks and Brooks.
c) Read the material that follows on extending and refining knowledge.
d) Complete the February activity.
e) Write in your journal.

REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS:

1) By how much did you increase your Wait Time I and II? What were your techniques to increase wait time?
2) How did the increased wait time produce improved student answers?
3) In what ways did the increased wait time seem to change the type of questions you asked and make you more flexible in the range and type responses you accepted?

READING:

Learning declarative and procedural knowledge requires much more than simply recalling information and mechanically performing a procedure. The most effective learning occurs when students develop an in-depth understanding of important knowledge so they can use that knowledge in life. To develop this understanding, learners need to extend and refine the knowledge they originally acquire. This occurs as learners examine and analyze knowledge and information in a way that helps them make new connections, discover or rediscover meaning, gain new insights, and clarify misconceptions.

For example, when first learning about the concept of free enterprise, a student might understand it well enough to generate a definition and some examples. However, broadening that understanding requires students to do more than recite the definitions or generate additional examples. It requires students to compare free enterprise to other economic structures or to figure out how the principles of free enterprise can be applied to predict what might happen in new specific situations. In other words, deepening understanding requires thinking about the information by using reasoning processes that are more complex than those used when knowledge simply is being recognized or reproduced. It necessitates using processes that change – extend and refine – the knowledge.

We will look at two (2) of the eight (8) complex reasoning skills identified by McRel and found in their book Dimensions of Learning by Marzano. These reasoning skills are offered as resources for teachers to use as they help students extend and refine their knowledge. It is not sufficient to simply ask students questions or give them assignments that require these types of reasoning processes; educators need to teach the reasoning processes. The following two reasoning processes can be used to deepen students’ understanding of what they are learning.

COMPARING: Identifying and articulating similarities and differences among items.

CLASSIFYING: Grouping things into definable categories on the basis of their attributes.

Each of these reasoning processes is used unconsciously by people every day. We compare and classify things routinely in informal interactions as well as in learning situations. However, when teachers require students to use these processes as a means of extending and refining knowledge, teachers must teach the steps involved in the process so that students use them deliberately and rigorously.

SECTIONS: When a reasoning process is taught, each of the following sections needs to be included in the lesson. (Specific examples are included when appropriate.)

1. Help students understand the process. Introduce the process to the students and help them understand the function or goal of the process.

COMPARING: Present different ways in which people use comparing such as a movie to the original book or two favorite games they play.

CLASSIFYING: Identify different ways classification is used in their lives such as classifying clothes in drawers to help you find them.

2. Give students a model for the process, and create opportunities for them to practice the process.

COMPARING

a) What do I want to compare?
b) What is it about them I want to compare?
c) How are they the same? How are they different?

CLASSIFYING

a) What do I want to classify?
b) What things are alike and could be put into a group?
c) How are these things alike?
d) What other groups can be made and how are the things alike in each group?
e) Does everything now fit into a group?
f) Would it be better to split up any of the groups or put any groups together?

3. As students study and use the process, help them focus on critical steps and different aspects of the process.

4. Provide students with graphic organizers or representations of the model to help them understand the process.

COMPARING: Use a venn diagram or comparison matrix.
CLASSIFYING: List in a categories chart or use a branching line chart.

5. Use teacher-structured and student-structured tasks. In the beginning teachers should use highly structured tasks (examples) to help the students develop skill in the process. As the students become more and more comfortable with the process the tasks should be more student structured so students direct an ever-increasing amount of their learning.

FEBRUARY ACTIVITY:

This month would you:

a) Select a declarative or procedural concept you wish to teach.
b) Decide if the knowledge you wish to teach can be best extended by comparison or classification.
c) Design the lesson following the 5 sections outlined above.
d) Teach the lesson.

Additional Resources

provided by: Tara A. Demers - "4" Project

Understanding and Implementing Constructivist Strategies Bevevino, M. M., Dengel, J., & Adams, K. (1999). Constructivist theory in the classroom: Internalizing concepts through inquiry learning. The Clearing House, 72(5), 275-278.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). Honoring the learning process. In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms (3-14). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). Structuring learning around primary concepts: The quest for essence. In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms (46-59). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). Becoming a constructivist teacher. In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms (101-118). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Perkins, D. N. (1999). The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 6-11.