Topics On This Page
A central problem in education is the failure
to adapt teaching to the way children think. From this perspective,
many learning disabilities are in fact created by schools (DeVries, p.
18). Children beginning school are especially vulnerable when
teachers demand they learn what they cannot understand.
Our son in Kindergarten came home from school shortly after the Christmas break with a note from his teacher. Her letter disclosed a chilling declaration that all students (including her Kindergarten class) were going to be spending most of their school days preparing for standardized academic tests to be given at the end of that school year. That meant that one-half of our child’s first formal year in public school was going to be dictated by state-directed learning. This flies in the face of a free learning environment!
Are the educational problems which exist today that much different than they were in Abelard’s day? Going against the tide of tradition, he proposed questions in several subject areas in order to get his students to think interrogatively. This method was frightening to his colleagues, because of the unknown consequential answers and further probes the students may procure by their own free initiatives.
In the following century Lombard and Aquinas adopted
Abelard’s method of allowing questions to be used in the teaching
process. However, both the "right" questions and
the "right" answers to those questions were controlled entirely
by the master instructor. As a result, their method changed little
the heavily-guarded, restricted traditional educational process? How
can a student construct their own world view if they are not given the
freedom to think and question freely on their own?
Comenius was the first person to provide a systematized concept for the learning process. He believed strongly that everyone—including rich, poor, males, females, aristocratic, and the repressed—in society should be provided the same opportunity for education. He held that learning should take place unhindered, so that one’s understanding of the outer world might be a living stream which flowed from their own minds.
Piaget took the position that society’s obligation is not only to instruct, but to provide a formative milieu in which the individual’s potential may be developed and not destroyed or smothered (p. 19).
Papert followed in the ideas of Piaget by saying that
children should be allowed to teach themselves, learning without being
traditionally taught. He saw the child as a capable builder of his
or her own mind. Papert also believed that although the focus of
learning should not be upon the machine, the computer in the child’s
control could accelerate learning.
Constructivism primarily is open-ended education, where the student (a human being) constructs knowledge in their own minds. This educational method supports active learning whereby knowledge is attained from internally generated efforts, rather than from passive learning which is something that externally "happens" to you.
I believe we can conclude that the child’s psychological experience in school affects possibilities for social, intellectual, affective, and moral development, and that the teacher’s educational world view affects the nature of the child’s psychological experience in school (DeVries, p. 396).
Constant learning means constant change, whereby growth occurs. Psychologists have observed that one of the greatest facilitators for change to occur is self-acceptance, or being accepted as one is. This runs directly counter to an implicit underlying philosophy of puritanism—that the way to correct a person’s attitude or behavior is to pour on a sufficient amount of shaming, ridicule, moral instruction, and social censure until finally the person feels bad enough about himself or herself that a change will be necessary. . . This is associated with psychological paralysis (Miller, 1985, p. 138).
Cannot a related comparison be made with some traditional methods of instruction, dubbed puritanical teaching? Shaming can be brought about by demanding "right" answers to questions, bestowal of low grades, and flunking out of school. Obviously most students learn to change even if it means being unnatural, rather than face the social censure if the pupil does not adapt to the curriculum requirements.
Because constructivism "honors" the student by freeing the learner to direct their own educational course, this method builds self-esteem, recognizing one’s present self as worthwhile and acceptable. But this is not to be confused with self-satisfaction or self-centeredness. Rather, self-acceptance is a perspective that recognizes and accepts imperfection in oneself and others as a condition of human nature. Error, though, is not cause for self-denigration (pp. 138, 139).
In summary, a free learning environment as proposed by Abelard, Comenius, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Piaget, Papert, and the theory of Constructivism is the kind of atmosphere that every teacher should aspire to provide for the learner. With the advancement of technology, it is now fully attainable. Yet, we have a long way to go before this becomes the most prevalent teaching/learning method practiced in our democratic society. It's up to the new leaders in educational technology to help make this a reality.