Week 4 and we are rolling ahead.
I love the ideas in constructionism. We learn when we try to construct things. The reason is that building is an active process. You have to think, hypothesize, try, rebuild, and invest mental energy when you are constructing something. It is a great theory.
I guess I have to talk about the prompt for this week though. How do the ideas presented in 11th chapter of the text by Pittler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski (2007) correlate with the ideas of constructionism. Well it all comes down to how information is learned. Instead of the teacher giving all of the details about a subject and then testing on it, students get involved in projects and learn about the ins and outs, main ideas, and small details while playing around.
The interactive spreadsheets in the text allow students to put in data, build graphs, and analyze data. Instead of the teacher lecturing about interest, the students experience interest. They build their own realities and assimilate that into their own understandings. It is pure constructivism. It is the same way the students experience part of WWII in the gaming example in the book. They build their own understanding about the causes of the war by playing the the factors that caused it.
I know that this program was under my grade level, but I also love the program tha NASA put out about designing a planet "Astroventure." I had to play around with it until I got a planet to hold human life. I just played around with different factors until it happened and I learned about some astronomy terms. It was fun, and I build knowledge.
Anything that we give to students that has a potential to let them be creative, let them learn, and let them explore is great. I think that exploration is something that lacks in today's education. Everything is layed out, and the students feel that they have no wiggle room to learn. If we give them a little freedom in some constructivist lessons, I think that they will engage.
It will be fun.
Let me know what you guys think,
Tyler
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tyler,
ReplyDeleteGreat post. I think teachers get bogged down in the technical end of providing such interactive lessons but you bring it down to basic theory and motivation; it sounds so easy! My students love interactive computer games and the ones you mention from our readings would be very appealing to any kid. I agree that when students are able to manipulate info/data they get to experience it first hand and makes true learning and understanding happen in the classroom.
Tyler,
ReplyDeleteYou hit the nail on the head with your post here! Education should be more about the exploration of figuring things out, rather than just hearing about how someone else accomplished a task. Students are able to learn and master so many skills with the project-based, problem-solving activities that we would be foolish not to have our students engaging in them on a regular basis.
Magan
Hands on learning is always going to be better than sitting listening to a lecture the entire class time. I bet you spent more time playing with the NASA game than if the website was nothing more than a bunch of words on the page. Like you said, when the kids can experience the information, they have to learn.
ReplyDeleteMike
Tyler:
ReplyDeleteI took your advice and visited "Astroventure". My students will thoroughly enjoy this hands-on multimedia experience and it supports our science curriculum. I also learned more about the effects of a planet's orbit, a planet's mass, and the job description of many scientists. This is an excellent example of constructionist learning! Thanks again for the suggestion