Abstract

The following article provides a summary of the theory of learning known as constructivism.
Constructivism has received a great deal of recent attention in the educational literature, and as a result,
has been defined in multiple ways. So many different definitions currently exist some scholars believe
constructivism has been emptied of meaning altogether. The following will attempt to bring some clarity
back to the theory by focusing on two different strands of constructivism; cognitive constructivism, as
outlined in the work of Jean Piaget, and social constructivism, as outlined in the work of Lev Vygotsky.
Implications for teaching are introduced, as well as an example of a constructivist classroom activity. The
summary also introduces the larger epistemological debate surrounding constructivism.

Keywords Accommodation; Adaptation; Assimilation; Cognitive Constructivism; Disequilibrium;

Objectivity; Piaget, Jean; Social Constructivism; Vygotsky, Lev; Zone of Proximal Development

Educational Theory > Constructivism

Overview

In recent years, constructivism has become one of the most often cited theories of learning in the
educational literature (Null, 2004). Its popularity has achieved such heights that it has been referred to
by various scholars as fashionable, faddish, and even by some, as a religion (Prouix, 2006). The frequent
discussion of constructivism isn't a problem per se, but it has created some confusion regarding its exact
meaning. As Harlow, Cummings, and Aberasturi (2006) acknowledge, "constructivism has taken on as
many different definitions as the number of people attempting to define it" (p. 41). As a result, they
argue, it has also been "emptied of meaning." Others concur, suggesting that "the educational
literature…is littered with [such] a range of definitions" that constructivism has become "almost…
indefinable" (Null, 2004, p. 180).

Perhaps more solid ground can be established by first recognizing the philosophical foundations of
constructivism. Although a relatively recent development in education, the issues addressed are ones
that have been debated for thousands of years. At the core, constructivism is about epistemology, a
branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge: what it is that we know, and how we know
what we know. Although oversimplified, philosophers have generally fallen into two camps; those who
believe knowledge is an approximation of an independent reality—a reality separate from the knower
and representative of the ultimate Truth—and those who believe that knowledge is created by human
minds. Constructivists fall in the second camp, arguing that knowledge is constructed by individuals
through their experience, and is not necessarily representative of 'the real world.'

The notion of knowledge as a construction helps bring some clarity to this elusive concept, as does the
recognition of one of its main pioneers. Although constructivism has roots in ancient philosophy, and its
ideas have been extended by many modern day learning theorists, Piaget is most often credited with its
development. As Prouix (2006) states, "Even if many other authors have contributed to numerous
aspects of the theory in a tacit or indirect way (e.g., Dewey, Kant, Rousseau, Vico, etc.) the main pioneer
of constructivism is without question Jean Piaget" (p. 2). The following summary, therefore, will focus
largely on the work of Piaget. In addition, the theoretical work of Vygotsky will be introduced. Vygotsky's
social constructivism is often contrasted with Piaget's cognitive constructivism, but the following will
focus on the way in which these two strands are complementary.
Piaget & Cognitive Constructivism

In order to understand the significance of Piaget's contribution, we must first place it within the context
of the epistemological debate referenced in the introduction. For the past several centuries, those who
believe that knowledge is an approximation of an independent reality representative of the ultimate
Truth have held sway in the philosophical courts. For equally as long, however, skeptics have argued
that we cannot know the truth of our knowledge, because "we would need access to the world that
does not involve our experiencing it" (von Glasersfeld, 1990, as cited in Prouix, 1996, p. 5). Despite what
von Glasersfeld calls "logically irrefutable arguments" on the part of the skeptics, they were always
summarily dismissed by pointing to the achievements of human knowledge—in ancient times, the
prediction of eclipses, for example, and in more recent times, the accomplishments of modern
technology. "In the face of such successes," von Glasersfeld (2006) argues, "it would, indeed, be
ridiculous to question the validity of knowledge" (p. 3).

What Piaget's theory does, however, is "make it possible to accept the skeptics' logical conclusion
without diminishing the obvious value of knowledge" (von Glasersfeld, 1996, p. 4). More specifically,
Piaget introduced the concept of adaptation to epistemology. Having trained first as a biologist, Piaget
studied the relationship between mollusks and their environment; the ability to adapt, he concluded,
was simply the ability to survive in a given environment. Knowledge, then, is not important to the extent
that it represents an external reality, but is important to the extent that it is viable. "Simply put, the
notion of viability means that an action, operation, conceptual structure, or even a theory, is considered
'viable' as long as it is useful in accomplishing the task or in achieving a goal that one has set for oneself"
(von Glasersfeld, 1998, as cited in Prouix, 2006, p. 5). In other words, "truth" is what works.

The question of what knowledge is, from a constructivist perspective, has now been answered to some
extent—it is not a representation of external reality or objective truth, but rather is  'truthful' to the
extent it is viable and adaptive—but the exact mechanisms by which knowledge is constructed have not
yet been explained. As Harlow, Cummings, and Aberasturi (2006) argue, those who overuse the term in
the literature often ignore the 'how' of constructivism. In other words, educators often pay lip service to
the idea that people make meaning, but fail to understand the processes by which this occurs. Even
teachers with the best intentions sometimes forget that cognitive conflict, for example, is essential for
new knowledge construction. We'll turn to Piaget's concepts of assimilation, accommodation, and
disequilibrium for a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms.

According to Piaget, all learning is motivated by a desire to maintain a state of equilibrium (Prouix,
2006). When an individual is confronted by information or an experience that contradicts his or her prior
knowledge, the learner is motivated to modify or adapt prior knowledge in order to return to
equilibrium. Therefore, those things that cause disequilibrium - sometimes referred to a perturbations
or cognitive conflicts - play a critical role in the learning process. "It is often through struggling to resolve
the disequilibration caused by perturbations that one comes to a resolution that deepens and revises
one's world-view" (Prouix, 2006, p. 5). As Fosnot (1996) argues, in order to fully understand the concept
of equilibration, one should understand its dynamic nature - "it is a dynamic 'dance'…of growth and
change' (p. 14). The dance occurs between two polar tendencies: our tendency to assimilate information
and our tendency to accommodate information.

Assimilation occurs when new experiences or information 'fit' into our existing mental structures. Stated
differently, "constructivism asserts that our previous experiences serve as the lenses through which we
read the world" (Prouix, 2006, p. 5). Therefore, assimilation is largely an unconscious process, one in
which we make new experiences fit into what we already know. Accommodation, on the other hand,
takes place in the face of perturbations. When new knowledge or experiences contradict what was
previously known, the learner must modify her existing cognitive structures, the new
knowledge/experience, or both. According to Prouix (2006) "the learner tries to deliberately adapt—or
accommodate—what is already known (previous knowledge) to a new experience that interrupts or
contradicts established interpretations…" (p. 5). In general, the mind tends to assimilate; only when we
have to accommodate does learning occur.

Although the basic structure of Piaget's theory of knowing has been put forth, it's worth noting a few
other points of emphasis. First and foremost, for Piaget and other constructivists in general, learning is
always an active process. Importantly however, 'active' implies both physical and mental activity; that is,
active in the sense of creating new mental structures and not just active in the sense of physically
moving one's body. As Prouix (2006) explains, "The word 'active' should then not be read in the literal
sense because it has a broader meaning in constructivism. The idea that the learners have to be active
does not imply that they have to construct a model physically with their hands, but instead that they
develop their structures of knowledge—by reflecting, analyzing, questioning themselves, working on
problems, and so on" (p. 5).

Secondly, Piaget's theory highlights the significant role of prior knowledge in the learning process, and
the implications this has for teaching as well (Prouix, 2006). Students are not blank slates, and
everything they experience in a classroom is interpreted in light of what they already know. As a result,
teachers should recognize that learners possess knowledge already, and use that source of knowledge
to build new understandings. Simply transmitting information to students, as traditional teachers do in a
lecture-based classroom, does not acknowledge the learner as either active, or as an individual with pre-
established cognitive structures.

As the two previous points imply, constructivists conceive of the classroom as learner-centered as
opposed to teacher-centered. Learner-centered does not suggest, however, that students are free to
create any meaning, to construct any knowledge. In other words, constructivists are often charged with
promoting relativism, a charge they dismiss with reference to the concept of fit and viability.
"Constructivism, with its concept of viability and 'fitting' does not imply that anything goes but merely
that theories or explanations construectd have to fit and be compatible with experiences lived" (Prouix,
2006, p. 5). In other words, knowledge that is useful is 'more truthful' than knowledge that is not.

Lev Vygotsky & Social Constructivism

Much of the current literature suggests that different strands of constructivism—mainly, cognitive
constructivism as outlined by Piaget and social constructivism as outlined by Vygtosky—are at odds with
one another (Cobb, 1996; Fosnot, 1996). "Thus there is currently a dispute over whether…learning is
primarily a process of active cognitive reorganization or a process of enculturation into a community of
practice" (Cobb, 1996, p. 35). Others argue, however, that Piaget recognized the importance of social
interaction in learning, even if he focused on it less than Vygotsky (Fosnot, 1996). Thus the two theories
are complementary more than they are competitive, and learning should be understood as a
cognitive and a social process, not either-or (Cobb, 1996).
Thus, although much of Vygotsky's work overlapped with Piaget's, he did in fact focus more heavily on
the role of culture, language and social interaction in the construction of knowledge. Like Piaget, he
believed learning to be developmental, but he made a distinction between what he viewed as the
construction of spontaneous concepts (also known as pseudoconcepts) and the construction of scientific
concepts (Fosnot, 1996). Spontaneous concepts, he believed, were developed by children during their
everyday activities, in the course of everyday life; these pseudoconcepts were similar to those studied
by Piaget. On the other hand, scientific concepts, he suggested, originate in more formal settings - like
the classroom - and represent culturally-agreed upon concepts. On their own, children would be unlikely
to develop scientific concepts, but with the help of adults and older children, they can master ideas and
thought processes that extend their knowledge. The 'space' where children extend their current
knowledge with adult assistance has become known as the Zone of Proximal Development.

Vygotsky is undoubtedly best known for the zone of proximal development, but two other concepts are
also worthy of mention. Like Piaget, Vygotsky studied the language of preschoolers, but what Piaget
concluded was 'egocentric' speech, Vygotsky concluded was social from the very beginning. He argued
that inner speech was the mechanism by which "culturally prescribed forms of language and reasoning
find their individualized realization" (as cited in Fosnot, 1996, p. 19). Vygotsky also concluded that inner
speech plays an important role in the development of spontaneous concepts, and in particular, the
attempts by children to communicate the concept to others.

Finally, Vygotsky was most interested in the role of other people in the development and learning
processes of children. He emphasized the cooperative nature of the learning task to such an extent, for
example, that "he viewed tests or school tasks that only looked at the child's individual problem solving
as inadequate, arguing instead that the progress in concept formation achieved by the child in
cooperation with an adult was a much more viable way to look at the capabilities of learners" (Fosnot,
1996, p. 19). He referred to cooperation as the dialogical nature of learning; others have since extended
this idea through the notion of 'scaffolding.' Scaffolding (ANDAMIAJE) is best exemplified by an
infant/mother interaction, during which the mother at times imitates the baby, and other times, varies
her response to further develop the child's response (Fosnot, 1996).

Further Insights

One of the important distinctions theorists make about constructivism is that it is a theory of learning—
and is even, at times, called a theory of knowing—and is not a theory of teaching. As a result,
constructivism doesn't tell teachers what they should do, but rather provides a general framework
within which they can work with students. As Prouix (2006) explains, "It is argued that constructivism
brings a proscriptive discourse on teaching, one that sets boundaries in which to work, but does not
prescribe teaching actions" (p. 5). von Glasersfeld elaborates, "It means that constructivism…cannot tell
teachers very much about what they should do, but it can specify a number of things which they
certainly should not do" (as cited in Prouix, 2006, p. 5). Within the realm of what they should do, he
further argues, the possibilities are limitless.

Therefore, providing a specific example of constructivist teaching in the classroom might be the best
way to introduce its application to the classroom. Before we proceed with the example, however, it
might be worthwhile to outline what Prouix (2006) refers to as "implications" for teaching (as opposed
to directives), as well as some pitfalls to be avoided. For example, constructivist teaching does not
suggest that teachers should stop explaining information; while teachers are encouraged to create
disequilibrium, or perturbations, for their students, this should not occur at the expense of explanation
and elaboration. As Prouix (1996) argues, "constructivism is not saying that teachers should not explain,
it only renders problematic the assumption that by 'telling' or explaining the learners will automatically
understand" (p. 5). He further suggests that constructivism does not imply students are always right or
that students will always learn on their own without guidance from teachers. Finally, he encourages
teachers to acknowledge the importance of prior knowledge in the learning process, as well as the role
of 'mistakes.' "Mistakes inform the learning process enormously and enable a better understanding of
the domain…" Mistakes should not, he continues, be viewed as "humiliating blunders" never "to be
repeated again" (Prouix, 2006, p. 5).

Fosnot (1996), in her edited book, "Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice," devotes several
chapters to examples of constructivist teaching in the classroom. The following example is taken from
the chapter on constructivist perspectives in mathematics, and serves as a summary of what is outlined
in greater detail by Schifter (1996). Schifter (1996) describes a lesson on measurement designed by a
first-grade teacher; the teacher uses masking tape to outline the shape of a boat on the classroom floor,
and asks her students how they would go about measuring it, in order to report its size to the King. After
several days of allowing her students to search for answers, the class decided to report the
measurement of the boat in terms of the length of Zeb's (a classmate) foot. The teacher describes:

On the third day of our exploration, I asked the children why they thought it was important to develop a
standard form of measurement (or in words understandable to a first grader, measurement that would
always be the same size) such as using only 'Zeb's foot' to measure everything. Through the discussions
over the past several days, the children were able to internalize and verbalize the need or important for
everyone to measure using the same instrument. They saw the confusion of using different hands,
bodies, or feet because of the inconsistency of size" (Schifter, 1996, p. 76).

The example highlights several characteristics of constructivist teaching. First and foremost, rather than
telling the class exactly how to perform a task (e.g., measurement), the teacher poses it in the form of a
problem and allows the class to come to its own solution. In other words, the teacher allowed the
students to construct their own meanings. Secondly, the example highlights the importance of
perturbations; the teacher's role wasn't necessarily to allay confusion, but even at times to further elicit
it. In addition, the example demonstrates the role of social interaction in the learning process; the
students made progress toward a solution by building upon each other's responses. And finally, the
example emphasizes the role of prior knowledge in learning situations; student's drew upon their
previous experiences with 'measurement' and, in this case, modified their existing understandings in
order to incorporate what they learned through this exercise.

Viewpoints

As stated in the introduction, constructivism is a frequent topic of conversation in the educational

literature, and has been defined in multiple ways. Limiting this summary to cognitive and social
constructivism does not do justice to the many forms in which it exists. Von Glasersfeld, for example,
while drawing heavily on the work of Piaget, has developed his own form of radical constructivism.
Jerome Bruner (1990) has extended the work of Vygotsky and other social constructivists in focusing on
the role of culture in learning. Similarly, this summary has only briefly touched upon the educational and
philosophical foundations of constructivism; Null (2004), for example, traces constructivist thought back
to Rousseau and G. Stanley Hall. Others have emphasized the contribution of John Dewey.
Despite its popularity, there are many who oppose constructivism and its approach to teaching and
learning. Constructivism, after all, addresses questions about knowledge and knowing that have been
debated for over two thousand years; the debates are likely to continue. Alexander (2006), for example,
discusses the "new skirmishes in the methodology wars," which have recently resurfaced after
positivists and constructivists had supposedly agreed to 'peacefully coexist' (p. 206). Although some
(Alexander, 2006; Johnson, 2005) propose a middle ground, or what Alexander (2006) refers to as "a
view from somewhere" that provides a place for both positivists and constructivists, it's likely that
educators and philosophers will continue to have differences of opinion.

Terms & Concepts

Accommodation: According to Piaget's theory of knowing, humans attempt to maintain a state of

equilibrium by either assimilating new information and experiences or accommodating them.
Accommodation takes place when new information contradicts what was previously known, so that the
learner must modify cognitive structures, modify the new information, or both.

Adaptation: Piaget transferred the concept of adaptation from his studies in biology to the studying of
human learning. He defined adaptation as the ability to survive in one's environment; with regard to
knowledge, he believed knowledge is 'true' to the extent that it's useful and adaptive, rather than the
extent to which it mirrors an objective, independent reality.

Assimilation: According to Piaget's theory of knowing, humans attempt to maintain a state of

equilibrium by either assimilating new information and experiences or accommodating them.
Assimilation takes place when new information is consistent with what was previously known, so that it
can be 'taken in' without modifying existing cognitive structures.

Cognitive Constructivism: Although there are many branches of constructivism, cognitive constructivism

and social constructivism are considered two of the primary strands. Cognitive constructivism is based
on the work of Piaget, and defines learning in terms of changes in cognitive structures. Although
cognitive and social constructivism are often considered to be at odds, more recently scholars have
recognized the ways in which they are complementary.

Disequilibrium: According to Piaget, learning is motivated by an individual's desire to maintain a state of

equilibrium. Disequilibrium occurs when new information or experience conflicts with what was
previously known, requiring the individual to modify or adapt in some way.

Scaffolding (ANDAMIAJE): An outgrowth of Vygotsky's social constructivism. Representative of the

cooperative, dialogical nature of learning, scaffolding occurs in dyads. For example, when a mother
imitates the gestures and sounds of an infant, but sometimes varies her response in order to elicit new
responses from the child, she is engaged in scaffolding.

Social Constructivism: Although there are many branches of constructivism, cognitive constructivism

and social constructivism are considered two of the primary strands. Social constructivism is based on
the work of Vygotksy, and defines learning in terms of social interaction, language, and culture.
Although cognitive and social constructivism are often considered to be at odds, more recently scholars
have recognized the ways in which they are complementary.
Zone of Proximal Development: One of the primary concepts of Vygotsky's theory of social
constructivism. According to Piaget, children are able to extend their current knowledge to a greater
extent by working with adults and older children. The 'space' in which they are challenged to extend
themselves has become known as the zone of proximal development.

Bibliography

Alexander, H.A. (2006). A view from somewhere: Explaining the paradigms of educational
research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40 , 205–221. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online
Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21492094&site=ehost-live

Al-Huneidi, A.M., & Schreurs, J. (2012). Constructivism based blended learning in higher
education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 7, 4–9. Retrieved December 15,
2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=79851140&site=ehost-live

Bächtold, M. (2013). What do students “construct” according to constructivism in science

education?. Research in Science Education, 43, 2477–2496. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO
Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92625063&site=ehost-live

Cardellini, L. (2006). The foundations of radical constructivism: An interview with Ernst von
Glasersfeld. Foundations of Chemistry, 8 , 177–187. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online
Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=aph&AN=22437372&site=ehost-live

Cobb, P. (1996). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist
perspectives. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.

Elkind, D. (2005). Response to objectivism and education. Educational Forum, 69 , 328–334. Retrieved

June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17685721&site=ehost-live

Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features
from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26, 43–71. Retrieved
December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=89926414&site=ehost-live

Fostnot, C.T.. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot

(Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Harlow, S., Cummings, R., & Aberasturi, S. (2006). Karl Popper and Jean Piaget: A rationale for
constructivism. Educational Forum, 71 , 41–48. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database
Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=ehh&AN=22991047&site=ehost-live
Johnson, M. (2005). Instructionism and constructivism: Reconciling two very good ideas. Retrieved June
10, 2007 from Education Resource Information Center
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/3
1/ba/07.pdf

Moford, J. (2007). Perspectives constructivism: Implications for postsecondary music education and
beyond. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 16 , 75–83. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online
Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=ehh&AN=25148461&site=ehost-live

Null, J. W. (2004). Is constructivism traditional? Historical and practical perspectives on a popular

advocacy. Educational Forum, 68 , 180–188. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from Education Resource
Information Center.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/3
1/3f/04.pdf

Prouix, J. (2006). Constructivism: A re-equilibration and clarification of concepts, and some potential
implications for teaching and pedagogy. Radical Pedagogy, 7 , 5. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO
Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21174718&site=ehost-live

Schrader, D. E. (2015). Constructivism and learning in the age of social media: Changing minds and
learning communities. New Directions For Teaching & Learning, 2015(144), 23–35. Retrieved January 6,
2016, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=111555969&site=ehost-
live&scope=site

von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism:

Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Suggested Reading

Brown, T.H. (2005). Beyond constructivism: Exploring future learning paradigms. Education Today, 2 ,
14–30. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17160280&site=ehost-live

Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Meltzer, E. (2006).
Constructivism and objectivism: Additional Questions. Educational Forum, 70 , 200–201. Retrieved June
10, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20786243&site=ehost-live

Henson, K. T. (2015). Curriculum planning: Integrating multiculturalism, constructivism, and education

reform. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Pass, S. (2004). Parallel paths to constructivism: Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing.

Flynn, P., Mesibov, D., Vermette, P., & Smith, R. (2004). Applying standards-based constructivism: A two-
step guide for motivating elementary students. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc.
Flynn, P., Mesibov, D., Vermette, P., & Smith, R. (2004). Applying standards-based constructivism: A two-
step guide for motivating middle and high school students. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc.

~~~~~~~~

Essay by Jennifer Kretchmar, Ph.D.