Table
of Contents
- Introduction
1.1 Purpose of the study
1.2 Research aims
- Review of Literature
2.1 Constructivism
2.1.1 History of Constructivism
2.1.2 Pedagogies based on
constructivism
2.1.3 Criticism of
constructivist teaching and learning
2.2 The importance of creativity in 21st century
2.2.1 Art in International Baccalaureate
MYP ( Middle Years Programme)
3. Methodology
3.1 Principles of constructivist teachers
3.2 The constructivist classroom setting
3.3 Myths of constructivist learning
3.4 Participants
3.5 Data Collection
3.6 Ethical issue
4. Findings and Discussion
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
6. Reflection
References
Chapter
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
of the study
Interest of this study relates to my
professional role as a visual art teacher who is responsible to develop a holistic
curriculum that can satisfied the IB ( International Baccalaureate) philosophy as well as to help students to
acquire knowledge and specific skill in the context of Visual Arts. In line with the IB philosophy emphasis on
concept based learning which is one of the pedagogy stems from constructivism,
this study will examine the practical issue of constructivist learning in the
practicing constructivist classroom.
Modern theories of learning claims the
construction of knowledge occurs as students build understanding in light of
experiences occurring in the world. Experience can occur within the context of
various pedagogic modes within a classroom setting; moreover, the development
of deep conceptual understanding of content and the process of (Visual Arts) as
informed by constructivist modes of learning –stress the active participation
of students in the process.
The findings of this research can be an
initial idea to develop a more comprehensive Visual Arts curricular framework
that fit differentiated learners’ needs. The existing curriculum planning is
based on Constructivist learning structure, this research will enable me to
rectify possible issues in the real classroom practice including teachers’
experiences, professionalism or teaching pedagogies.
The project stems from realisation that
some of the MYP ( International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme) students
are facing difficulties in Constructivist learning in Visual Arts class. There
is a gap between their conceptual understanding and the application of specific
art skills and techniques. This issue involves a wide range of possibilities
including the curricular planning, teachers’ professionalism in Constructivist
learning pedagogy, students’ prior knowledge and the learning environment.
Besides, the research of this study allows
me to gain insight of how students encounter problems during classroom
activities and their assessment. For instance, time management and self
management skill are the key point to carry out their assessment on time.
Collaboration skill and communication skill is also contribute to their success
in the subject.
The school I am currently working with is
adapting International Baccalaureate as the curriculum framework which focuses
on learners centre structure. The Theory of Concept-based learning and teaching
is one of the practices to develop Constructivist learning classroom. In IB (International
Baccalaureate curriculum planning, concept is the context integrating the
factual knowledge and key skills. However, the poor assessment performance in
both formative and summative task reflects the pitfall and practical issues of
Constructivist learning in Visual Arts class. Some students are able to capture
the key concept and conceptualise the meaning in depth, but they were not able
to carry out the task and meet the highest rubric caused by the lack of
proficiency of the specific art skills and techniques. This study will explore
the principles, myth and pitfall of Constructivist learning.
1.2
Research aims
This research addresses a significant gap
in the literature as the theory used to identify Constructivism learning and
the real classroom practices that happen in Visual Art classroom. Accordingly,
the aim of this project is to investigate myth, pitfall and factors that impact
the Constructivism learning and teaching experiences in the context of Visual
Art by examine the accounts of a group of students at an IB school. The
specific research questions are:
1. What do constructivist pedagogies look
like in a Visual Arts classroom?
2.
What are the benefits of constructivist theory in the arts discipline?
3. Does constructivist learning in the
visual Arts classroom develop students’ creative and reflective thinking?
4. What accounts do students give of their
experiences in the Constructivist Visual Art classroom?
4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of
Constructivist learning in Visual Art classroom?
It is envisaged that the study will make a
theoretical contribution to the body of knowledge related to education and
visual arts with a particular emphasis on IB MYP school education. Findings of
the study will provide a more specific knowledge and understanding for
constructivist pedagogy in the context of Arts. Besides, it also will examine
the practical issues occur in constructivist learning including teachers’ and
students’ misconception of the theory, the credibility of IB philosophy in
constructivist learning and the impact of constructivist learning in Visual Arts.
Significant understanding about the school and the social values embodied by
the school will be gleaned from those who have indicated a desire to
participate in the project. Discussion with my coordinators and school head and
course tutor was helpful in the design of the research question.
Chapter 2: Review of the literature
In order to
conduct a research focusing on students’ perception of their learning
experiences in the Visual Art classroom, it is essential to review several
related bodies of literature within the philosophy and pedagogies in a school
curriculum. To
understand the epistemology and ontology of the Constructivist theory, the literature
research for this study include the philosophy of John Dewey (1859-1952), Lev
Vygosky (1896-1934) and Jean Piaget ( 1896-1980). Besides, journal and research
paper of the study of Constructivist in real classroom practices is also part
of the resources. Analysis of the strength and weaknesses of the Constructivist
theory provide the foundation to design the structure of this study, including
the design of methodology and methods to be used. Another aspect of the
literature research will be the pedagogies used in Visual Arts class including
both Constructivist and traditional root based learning teaching pedagogy.
2.1 Constructivism
2.1.1 History of Constructivism
The expression of
“Constructivist epistemology” was first used by Jean Piaget in 1967 in the
article “Logic and Scientific knowledge”. Theory of Constructivism is generally
attributed to Jean Piaget, who articulated that knowledge is internalized by
learners. Piaget’s basic research problem was: What is the nature of knowledge?
How does it grow and develop? According to Piaget, the nature of knowledge
should be studied empirically where it actually is constructed and developed
throughout the learning process. ( 1937, p 37). His works included the study of
children development of the ideas about time, space and velocity in the context
of science.
He developed his
theory based on biology: included the process of adaptation, consisting of
assimilation and accommodation. He believes that learners should be
self-regulated hence thinking should be understood through the experiences and
adaptation to the external world. He suggested that accommodation is the
process of reframing one’s mental representation of the external world to fit
new experiences. Constructivist learning encourages learners to discover and
construct their knowledge by experiences, experiment and collaboration with
peers.
“Establish what
we have called a constructivist theory of knowledge and, at the same time,
refute the empiricist and nativist theories. The essential problem of a theory
of knowledge is: how is new knowledge constructed? Is it, as empiricism
contends, always derived from observing reality, or is it performed in the
human mind, and thus innate? Even our earlier work, I believe, clearly showed
the insufficiencies of both the empiricist theories.” (Piaget 1980, p 3).
James. M Applefield, Richard
Huber and Mahnaz Moallem (2001) explicit constructivism is an epistemological
views of knowledge which emphasizing knowledge construction rather than
knowledge transmission and the recording of information transferred by others. Constructivism is a theory of knowledge (epistemology)
that argues humans generate knowledge and meaning from an interaction between
their experiences and their ideas. Piaget called this system of knowledge
schemata.
The influence of
Piaget is evident in all reference to constructivism. However, he was merely focused
on the nature of knowledge in constructivism, not specific into the field of
education. Lev Vygotsky ( 1896-1934) was
a main researcher to carry forward Piaget’s theory, but focused on the Social
constructivism. Vygotsky examined the fundamental of the role of people,
parents, peers and teachers, possess in children’s learning from the earliest
days ( Watson, 2000). He believe that learning is constructed jointly through
social interaction, and understanding can be enhances with a connection established
to what children know and can already do ( Watson, 2000).
While
Piaget was interested in epistemology and knowledge, Vygotsky was more
interested in understanding the social and cultural conditions for human
learning. Hence, his writings are much closer to the concerns of educational
field. Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development, described the distance
between the actual development level ( as determined by independent
problem-solving) and the level of potential development ( as determined through
problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable
peers) Vygotsky further claimed that instruction is only appropriate when it
proceeds ahead of development. It is in this way that instruction plays an
extremely important role in development.
Social
Constructivist researchers agree with emphasis of individual make meanings
through the interactions with each other and with the environment they live in.
Knowledge is thus a product of humans and the social constructed.( Ernest 1991)
. A further characteristic of the role of facilitator in the social
constructivist is that the instructor and learners are equally involved in
learning from each other as well ( Holt and Willard-Holt 2000). This suggested
that the learning process is both subjective and objective based on the context
and cultural background of the learners. Similarly, the IB MYP framework which
imposes on conceptual learning thus students are able to transfer the
understanding from one subject to another using the concept lens is an
appropriate platform to examine the constructivist approach.
2.1.2 Pedagogies based on constructivism
Constructivism is
currently being used widely in educational literature. Many interpretations of
constructivism exist and there is considerable literature documenting various
approaches and foci. As such, there are
several theme of constructivism within the field of education. Moshman (1982) identified three types of constructivism including
exogenous constructivism (knowledge as realism), endogenous constructivism
(cognitive constructivism) and dialectical constructivism (social
constructivism). Exogenous constructivism is the study of Piaget’s research on
development lay in his work on cognitive structures “with their genetically
determined base, continually being adapted and elaborated through individual
life experiences, of the active nature and learning and the role of cognitive
conflict or contradiction in enabling understanding” (Watson, 2000, p. 135).
Constructivist learning is often
accomplished by using hands-on approach, experimentation, discoveries and
self-regulated activities. Many innovative discovery learning stems from the
constructivism theory, including problem-based learning (PBL) and Inquiry based
learning ( IL). Far from being contrary to the guided learning, constructivist
learning encourages learners to be independent and self-regulated. Piaget
considered children’s self-discovery of great importance, rather than having
children rely on assistance from others (Watson, 2000). In constructivist
leaning, the role of learners and teachers are no longer the same as root based
learning. (Guided learning)
Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn(2007) describe a project called Gen Scope, an
inquiry-based science software application as evidence of studies supporting
the success of the constructivist problem-based and inquiry learning methods.
In this study, students using the Gen Scope software showed significant gains
over the control groups, with the largest gains shown in students from basic
courses. Hmelo-Silver et al (2007) also cite a large study by Geier on the
effectiveness of inquiry-based science for middle school students, as
demonstrated by their performance on high-stakes standardized tests. The
improvement was 14% for the first cohort of students and 13% for the second
cohort. This study also found that inquiry-based teaching methods greatly
reduced the achievement gap for African-American students.
Guthrie et al. (2004) compared three
instructional methods for third-grade reading: a traditional approach, a
strategies instruction only approach, and an approach with strategies
instruction and constructivist motivation techniques including student choices,
collaboration, and hands-on activities. The constructivist approach, called
CORI (Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction), resulted in better student reading
comprehension, cognitive strategies, and motivation.
In The Child and the Curriculum (1902),
John Dewey discusses two major conflicting schools of thought regarding educational
pedagogy. The first is centered on the curriculum and focuses almost solely on
the subject matter to be taught. Dewey argues that the major flaw in this
methodology is the inactivity of the student; within this particular framework,
"the child is simply the immature being who is to be matured; he is the
superficial being who is to be deepened" (1902, p. 13). He argues that in
order for education to be most effective, content must be presented in a way
that allows the student to relate the information to prior experiences, thus
deepening the connection with this new knowledge.
At the same time, John Dewey was alarmed by
many of the "child-centered" excesses of educational-school
pedagogues who claimed to be his followers, and he argued that too much reliance
on the child could be equally detrimental to the learning process. In this
second school of thought, "we must take our stand with the child and our
departure from him. It is not the subject-matter which determines both quality
and quantity of learning" (Dewey, 1902, p. 13-14). According to Dewey, the
potential flaw in this line of thinking is that it minimizes the importance of
the content as well as the role of the teacher.
Guthrie ( 2004)
studied the differences between three instructional methods for third grade
reading using traditional approach, strategies instruction and constructivist
motivation approach. As a result, the constructivist approach provoked better
students reading comprehension, cognitive strategies and motivation.
2.1.3
Criticism of constructivist teaching and learning
Although there are many researchers
revealed the benefits and strength of constructivist learning, there is
considerable opposition to the teaching theory.
“It would be a mistake to interpret the current constructivist view of
learning as a rationale for reviving pure discovery as a method of instruction.
Pure discovery did not work in, 1960s, did not work in 1970s and 1980s, so it
is little reason to believe that pure discovery will somehow work today.” (Richard .E. Mayer 2004)
Mayer (2004) argues against discovery-based
teaching techniques and provides an extensive review to support this argument.
Mayer's arguments are against pure discovery, and are not specifically aimed at
constructivism: "Nothing in this article should be construed as arguing
against the view of learning as knowledge construction or against using
hands-on inquiry or group discussion that promotes the process of knowledge
construction in learners. The main conclusion I draw from the three research
literatures I have reviewed is that it would be a mistake to interpret the
current constructivist view of learning as a rationale for reviving pure
discovery as a method of instruction."
Mayer’s point is that people often misuse
constructivism to promote pure discovery-based teaching techniques. He proposes
that the instructional design recommendations of constructivism are too often
aimed at discovery-based practice (Mayer, 2004). Sweller (1988) found evidence
that practice by novices during early schema acquisition, distracts these
learners with unnecessary search-based activity, when the learner's attention
should be focused on understanding (acquiring schemas).
Mayer's concern is how one applies
discovery-based teaching techniques. He provides empirical research as evidence
that discovery-based teaching techniques are inadequate. Here he cites this
literature and makes his point “For example, a recent replication is research
showing that students learn to become better at solving mathematics problems
when they study worked-out examples rather than when they solely engage in
hands-on problem solving (Sweller, 1999). Today’s proponents of discovery
methods, who claim to draw their support from constructivist philosophy, are
making inroads into educational practice. Yet a dispassionate review of the
relevant research literature shows that discovery-based practice is not as
effective as guided discovery.” (Mayer, 2004, p. 18)
Beside, Kirschner, Sweller, Clark ( 2007)
also stated that:
“After a half century of advocacy
associated with instruction using minimal guidance, there appears no body of
research supporting the technique. In so far as there is any evidence from
controlled studies, it almost uniformly supports direct, strong instructional
guidance rather constructivist-based minimal guidance during the instruction of
novice to intermediate learners. Even for students with considerable prior
knowledge, strong guidance while learning is most often found to be equally
effective as unguided approaches. Not only is unguided instruction normally
less effective; there is also evidence that it may have negative results when
student acquire misconceptions or incomplete or disorganized knowledge”
The study by Kirschner et al has been
widely cited and is important for showing the limits of minimally-guided
instruction. Hmelo-Silver et al. responded, pointing out that Kirschner et al.
conflated constructivist teaching techniques such as inquiry learning with
"discovery learning". (See the preceding two sections of this
article.) This would agree with Mayer's viewpoint that even though
constructivism as a theory and teaching techniques incorporating guidance are
likely valid applications of this theory, nevertheless a tradition of
misunderstanding has led to some question "pure discovery"
techniques.
Therefore, how does one define a classroom
as student-centered through a constructivist lens?
It is essential to point out that
misconceptions exist as to what are truly constructivist learning strategies,
approaches and environments. One misconception is that of co-operative learning
and collaborative teaching. As Mvududu (2005) points out, “co-operative and
collaborative teaching methods provide the opportunity for more competent
students to scaffold tasks as they interact with less competent students” (p.
50). This view relates to the Vygotsky’s view of the zone of proximal
development, whereby less knowledgeable others benefit from interactions with
more knowledgeable others. Mvududu (2005) further asserts that students can
work in co-operative learning groups, many of which are consistent with views
on constructivist learning.
Another misconception of constructivism is
that students should always be actively and reflectively constructing.
Construction of knowledge can occur through varied types of instruction, to
include learning by experiencing; learning by intuition; learning by listening;
learning by practice; and learning by conscious reflective thinking. “By
engaging in these activities, students are able to construct valuable but
different kinds of knowledge. Instructors, themselves, must learn to balance
these activities to meet the varying needs and goals of their students.”
(Mvududu, 2005).
Constructivist classrooms should provide
students with the opportunity to explore, speculate, and brainstorm in an
emotionally supportive atmosphere. Students’ willingness to engage in
activities, participate in discussions, and write about experiences is
important. “Activities that engage students might include group projects, such
as reader’s theatre, a process in which students write dramatic scenes from a
book and present it as drama to a class.” (Passman, 2001). Furthermore,
students must be motivated to work through problems and accept that right and
wrong solutions are a part of the learning process. Through this process, the
teacher must act as a facilitator of every student’s social and personal
construction process that promotes “each individual’s exploration and
resolution of ideas within the socio-cultural context” (Mvududu, 2005, p.50)
As such, it is important to examine the
principles and criteria for constructivist learning. How does a constructivist
classroom look like? What are the fundamental? Therefore, the purpose of this
study is to examine the principles of constructivist stated by the previous
researchers.
2.2
The importance of creativity in 21st century
Visual
Art is an important component of school curriculum that incorporates creative
teaching and learning that is not accessible through any other learning
experience ( Emery, 1998). It is a visual language that helps students to
perceive, express, communicate, interpret and understand the world ( Barrett,
1998). The value of arts is well acknowledged by many researchers.
The arts are understood to provide unique
opportunity for aesthetic and sensory learning, cognitive, physical and social
learning (Queensland School Curriculum Council, 2001. P12). The benefit of
study in the arts extends, therefore beyond the arts classroom. Gelineau (
2004) emphasizes that engagement in an arts-rich curriculum leads to enhanced
abilities in all subject areas. Similarly, Eisner (1998) warns that attempts to
justify the art on the basis of their non-art outcomes may fail to recognize
the real benefits of art learning.
Creativity places an important role to
develop cognitive thinking, the capability to synthesize and interpret meanings
from different contexts. William (1999, p411) noted “ Creativity helped to
attempt higher-order cognitive constructs have much surface appeal, their
utility is tied to the clarity and fidelity of their definitions and assessment
procedures.” Today’s students are not satisfied by factual knowledge, but
meta-cognitive knowledge which can prepare them to the real life situation in
future. Mahnaz Fatemi Adqa (2011) stated that “Creativity is at the heart of
the 21st century educational work.”
Barnes ( 2002) acknowledges that ignoring
the arts would be similar to ignoring what makes us human. If artistic
experiences are fundamental to being human, it is essential that the arts are
incorporated into every student’s experience at school ( Barnes, 2002)
Furthermore, Smith(1999) clearly states that the arts provide insight into
significant human ideas and values, worthwhile qualities of experience.
Another purpose of this study is to address
the connection between cognitive thinking driven by the constructivist learning
in relation to creative thinking in the art discipline. Understanding the
important of creativity in the information fluctuated rapidly century will
provide a realistic platform to enhance the validity of the outcome of the
study.
Human ingenuity drives human revolution
hence creativity plays an important role in the education. Jonathan A. Plucker
( 2004, p.83) stated that “ Creativity is an integral part of any understanding
of human education and psychology.” Guilfor d J.P ( 1967, p.10) defined
creativity is divergent thinking which involves production of ideas, generating
of ideas and improvements to ideas. “Creativity is the interaction among
aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a
perceptible product within a social context” (Plucker, Beghetto 2002 , p. 90)
2.2.1
Art in International Baccalaureate MYP ( Middle Year Programme)
“ Current interest in what it means to
teaching a constructivist manner was sparked by authors such as Atwell ( 1987)
and Fosnot ( 1989) in the reading/language arts area” ( Richardson, 2003,p.
1625). In the MYP, the arts challenge students to consider authentic issues and
develop their skills beyond superficiality and imitation. Students are
encouraged to communicate their artistic intention and function as artists.
They are guided to perform, create and present art in ways that engage and
convey personal interpretation, experiences and ideas. Through the exploration
of art, students expand their abilities to apply their knowledge across all
subject area.
“Creativity may be viewed as the ability to
form remote ideational associations to generate original and useful solutions
to a given problem.” ( Atchley, Keeney, & Burgess 1999, p. 485) MYP arts
value the process of creating artwork as much as the finished product; the two
elements combined informed what students have experienced, learned and attempted
to convey. In this way, the educational value of any artwork is seen by placing
it within the context of its creation. In terms of assessment, rubric for each
objective are given as a guideline at the beginning of the unit. Students will
have a basic understanding of the task requirement before they commence the
formative and summative tasks.
In
the MYP, development in the arts is not seen as a linear process, and students
are allowed to have varied entry points to their understanding in the arts,
whether through observation, experimentation, reflection on existing artwork,
practice and development of techniques, or through the simple need to express
an idea. “ Teaching and learning in the arts emphasizes the value of process as
well as product. While many subjects area focus on assessing the end product of
a student’s work, it is common for subjects in the arts to use authentic
assessment, where the artistic process, exploration of ideas and discovery are
seen as integral components of learning.” ( Clark and Zimmerman, 2004:
Eisner,2004)
A more complete understanding of the art
form will develop when the overall art experience of students includes hands‑on application of skills, reflection and observation of the context
and culture of the art form, as well as a clear reflection of their own ongoing
artistic development. Within the constructivist learning approaches, students
construct deeper understanding throughout the creative process.
McKeachie (1999) offers the following
descriptive teaching strategies: creating student trust and an environment to
openly ask and express questions; emphasis on student to student discussion and
less on lecture and question and answer sessions; emphasis on deeper learning
rather that rote learning; more of an emphasis on student choice and intrinsic
motivation; emphasis on student goals and teaching to those goals; emphasis on
attitudinal and affective outcomes; and lastly, a concern about student
misconceptions and working to clarify those misconceptions.
In
conclusion, when looking at the history of constructivism and the theories that
have contributed to the working definition that exists today, it is apparent
that constructivism is not without its faults. However, it is a viable theory
that seems to have a natural fit and that warrants further research towards
effective implementation within art classrooms.
This study will also takes into account the
understanding that learning is constructed through experiences, drawing on the
original work of John Dewey ( 1934) and later writers, Greene( 1996), they
suggested that one role for education is to assist the construction of
knowledge. Base on this philosophy, the school curriculum can enable the
construction of new knowledge through experiences in a range of subjects areas.
Similarly, learning in the arts can facilitate the construction of new
knowledge through arts experiences.
Chapter 3 Methodology
In order to
address the gap in the literature in chapter 2, there is a need to design a
study that captures the principles and practices of constructivist learning
approaches in the physical classroom practice. Therefore, this study will
generate the accounts of a group of students and teachers at one school and
subjecting them to analysis. The visual art lesson plans is structured base on
the principles of constructivist teaching from the In Search of Understanding: the case for constructivist Classroom by
Brooks and brooks. The following descriptors were used as a framework for
lesson development and were used as a device to comprehend constructivist
pedagogies:
3.1 Principles of constructivist teachers-
1)
Encourage
and accept student autonomy and initiative.
2)
Use
raw data and primary resources along with manipulative, interactive and
physical materials.
3)
When
framing tasks, constructivist teachers use cognitive terminology.
4)
Allow
students responses to drive lessons, shift instructional strategies and alter
content.
5)
Encourage
student inquiry by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions and encourage
students to ask of one another.
6)
Engage
students in experiences that might engender contradictions to their initial
hypothesis and then encourage discussion.
7)
Allow
wait time after posing questions.
8)
Provide
time for students to construct relationships and create metaphors. ( Brook and
Brook 1993)
When I design the unit planning, I will ensure all these principles are
included into the lesson plans thus the fundamental of constructivist learning
can be carried out the in the classroom.
3.2 The constructivist classroom setting
In the research
of Constructivism in Theory and Practices ( 2001), James. M Applefield, Richard
Huber and Mahnaz Moallem (2001) observed a Science classroom practicing
constructivist theory. The initial problem of the study was to determine
teachers’ understanding of the philosophy of Constructivism and put it into
classroom practices. This is a very informative article providing the
philosophy of the theory and analysis of the real classroom practice. Basic
principles of constructivist classroom setting were being elaborated. Issues,
myths and misconception were being agitated in the study.
James. M
Applefield, Richard Huber and Mahnaz ( 2001) outlined the principles of a
constructivist classroom with the following details:
1) Teacher Roles,
Students Roles and interaction
In a
constructivist classroom, students are the center of learning. Teacher goes
around in the classroom to observe and give appropriate guidance to students
who need help. The prior knowledge of students’ and teachers’ role in a
constructivist classroom is significantly important to support effective
learning. Students need to know their responsibility in a group activity and
teacher needs to provide appropriate guidance as well.
2) Establishing a
cooperative learning classroom environment
Teacher values
the importance of cooperative learning tasks and creating an interactive
classroom environment that promote inquiry and problem solving skills. Besides,
students are given freedom to chase their own ideas, construct their own rules
and explanations which enhanced their self-esteem.
3) Creating the
conditions to guide students’ learning: The Constructivist learning and its
rationale
The importance of
encouraging students to generate, demonstrate and exhibit their knowledge and
share with their peers. Besides, the structure of the inquiry learning should
be “a spiral pattern” which promoting developing of cognitive thinking from
lower to higher level. For instance, students were using different methods to
construct a simple circuit at the first stage of acquiring the basic knowledge.
Constructivism
offers the theoretical foundation that learners actively construct knowledge
from the intersection of previously acquired understandings with the new
information the learner encounters. Per Fox (2001), generally suggested
guidelines of current views of constructivism encompass the following criteria:
1. Learning is an
active process.
2. Knowledge is
constructed, rather than innate, or passively absorbed.
3. Knowledge is
invented not discovered.
4a. All knowledge
is personal and idiosyncratic.
4b. All knowledge
is socially constructed.
5. Learning is
essentially a process of making sense of the world.
6. Effective
learning requires meaningful, open-ended, challenging problems for the learner
to solve. (p.24)
This study
imposed the growing evidence of the importance of constructivist learning in
Science and Mathematics program. Problem-based inquiry has become one of the
significance of 21st century learning in the digital age. In the context of
media saturated world, students’ challenge is to synthesize, analyse and
interpret the information which requires higher cognitive thinking skill.
Therefore, the challenge of constructivist teacher is to simulate learners’
thinking to be able to integrate knowledge from various perspectives.
3.3 Myths of constructivist learning
James. M
Applefield, Richard Huber and Mahnaz Moallem (2001) also identified, analyzed
and countered several misconceptions and myths that evolved concerning
constructivist instructional practices related to these essential questions:
Myth 1: There is
no focus for learning, no clear goal in constructivist-based instruction.
Myth 2:
Constructivist based instruction is not thoughtfully planned; carefully
preparation is less important than in traditional instruction.
Myth 3: There is
an absence of structure for learning in a constructivist learning environment.
Myth 4: As long
as learners are involved in discussion and other forms of social interaction,
learning will take place.
Myth 5: Since
teachers are not primarily engaged in delivering instruction (lecturing and
explaining), their role in the classroom is less important. (
For the purpose
of my study, I will focus on the cognitive thinking and knowledge construct in
the context of visual art in order to examine the effectiveness of
constructivist learning. This guideline will provide a platform for the design
of methodology.
An effective
constructivist classroom is far more sophisticated than the principles drawn by
the researcher. For instance, differentiated learning pedagogy, teachers’
questioning skills and a series of formative task to determine learners’
thinking level is important to ensure the quality of learning. Besides,
constructivist teacher require a lot of planning and preparation compare to
traditional teacher centered practice. For instance, in order to drive the
learners’ interest from a subject matter, different approaches should be implemented
to cater different learner’s needs. Ideally, task should be designed to feed
multiple intelligences learners in the classroom. Beside, classroom
organization plays an important role in constructivist learning including
scaffolding and effective grouping techniques. Hence, details of specific
pedagogy assimilate in constructivist practice is needed in order to ensure the
validity of this study.
3.4 Participants
This study will
involve MYP students from Fairview Johor Bahru campus. The context of this
study would be MYP students at the age range of 12 to 15 years old. The study
will be carried out during Visual Arts class. Approximately 80 minutes per
lesson as weekly basic. Duration of the study will be 4 weeks in all the Grade
8 Visual Arts classes.
The study will
examine student’s adaptability in Constructivist learning, analyse the validity
of the theory using different learning styles in the classroom practice. The
outcome of the study will be discussed and shared among all four campuses in order
to rectify issues in current Visual Arts classroom.
A number of
selected MYP students will be interviewed after their formative or summative
and assessment task at the end of the semester. Students’ perception of their
learning in the framework is important to examine practical issues in the
classroom. The aims of the interview are to identify students’ learning
difficulties in the classroom and to seek for similarities and common issues in
the Constructivist practice among all classes. A draft of the semi structured
interview is included in the appendix of this document. Based on the four open
ended questions, answers given by participants from different classes will be
gathered and analysed.
This study
proposes to investigate the Constructivist learning in a MYP Visual Arts
classroom. It will particularly focus on the relevant pedagogies, teachers’
experiences and students’ feedback in anticipation of the research question.
This study will use semi structured interview and quantitative methodology to provide
the structure for design, implementation and evaluation.
3.5 Interview
Students who
involved in the study will be interviewed after their formative or summative
and assessment task at the end of the semester (Estimated date: September 2014)
Students’
perception of their learning in the framework is important to examine practical
issues in the classroom. The aims of the interview are to identify students’
learning difficulties in the classroom and to seek for similarities and common
issues in the Constructivist practice among all classes.
A draft of the
semi structured interview is included in the appendix of this document.
Based on the four
open ended questions, answers given by participants from different classes will
be gathered and analysed.
3.6 Quantitative Data collection
Final outcome of
the study will include Quantitative result from the formative and summative
assessment base on four criteria in IB MYP Visual Arts framework, including :
Criteria A:
Knowledge and Understanding
Beside the content
of students’ Developmental Workbook (Process journal), this criteria will be
assessed by an Art history research essay that demonstrate students’
understanding of the particular art movement of the unit. For instance, if Pop Art is the context of
the unit, students will need to analyse the characteristic of different Pop art
artists so on and so forth.
Criteria B:
Application
To assess
students’ specific art skill and technique for the unit learned, including
basic drawing and painting skills, capability of manipulating the materials and
equipment. If students are to create a painting for the summative assessment,
the basic painting and colour mixing skills will be assessed.
Criteria C:
Reflection and Evaluation
All MYP Visual
Arts students will have a Developmental Workbook as their process journal to
annotate, reflect and analyse their creative thinking as the evidence of
learning.
Criteria C will
assess students’ self-awareness throughout the entire creative process through
their ongoing reflection in the Developmental Workbook.
Criteria D:
Personal Engagement
This will be
students’ demonstration of their self-initiative and Approaches to learning
skills, including collaboration, communication, thinking, tme management and
self-management skills.
Data analysis
Formative
assessment in MYP Visual Art class included classroom activities, weekly
assignment and the content of the Developmental Workbook. Teachers will assess
students’ understanding base on observation and individual tutorial. Summative
assessment is normally project based which require students’ self-regulated
planning and creating skills.
Both grading from
formative or summative assessment will constitute the final grade for the
entire semester.
Analysis of the
assessment result will be compiled and analysed after gathering from all MYP
Visual Arts classes. Study of the highest and lowest achievement in all
criteria will provide a clear picture of the students’ learning difficulties
and strength in all aspects. The data will also explicit the pattern of matrix
for the selection of students. For instance, students who have language barrier
might have a lower achievement in Criteria A which require them to express
their thought in writing or speaking.
This data will be
analysed after the interview with students in order to further understand the
challenges to learning in MYP Visual Arts class. I will use the benchmark
analysis data which provide a holistic view of the students performance
throughout the whole academic year to justify which of the abovementioned
criteria is above or below average grade. Hence, I will conduct interview to
further investigate the reason behind the results attained in the data.
Data collected
from the participants will be physically handed back to them. All relevant
digital data will be deleted.
Process of Data
collection
3.7 Ethical Issues
All potential
participants will be invited by email regarding the study. Details of the email
include the purpose of the study, the rights of withdrawal, the potential
benefits to the participants and the safety arrangement to minimise the risks.
Once the feedback from the participants is confirmed, the Participation
Respondents Information Sheet will be given to the participants before the study,
they will be asked to elaborate the content base on their understanding in
order to ensure there is no misconception or misunderstanding. Once the
participants agree to participate in the study, a consent form will be given to
the parents first as the participants are under 18 years old. The purpose and
rights of withdrawal will be clearly stated in the consent form as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment