Currently, this blog is
continuing its account of the liberated federalism model of governance and
politics.[1] With this posting, the blog looks further
into suggested instructional methods in civics that teachers can utilize as
most amenable to this featured construct.
The previous posting identified the use of case studies and community service
projects – in both strategies, one does not eliminate other methods, but simply
states that the featured methods allow teachers to get at what liberated
federalism deems to be important.
That posting also identified the psychological school of thought
that supports the efforts that liberated federalism pursues. That would be constructivism as developed
from the works of Jean
Piaget and Lev S. Vygotsky and runs counter to those pedagogical views
emanating from behavioral psychology.
This posting will share more of Piaget and Vygotsky’s ideas.
The
Piaget based model, as explained by Geoffrey Scheurman,[2]
calls effective human learning as “cognitive constructivism.” It is dependent on a developmental view. Scheurman writes
[Piaget] believed that people develop universal
forms or structures of knowledge (i.e., prelogical, concrete, or formal) that
enable them to experience reality. This
view holds that while an autonomous “real” world may exist outside the learner,
he or she has limited access to it. The
emphasis in learning is on how people assimilate new information into existing
mental schemes, and how they restructure schemes entirely when information is
too discrepant to be assimilated.[3]
Within the cognitive
constructivism model, the teacher acts as a facilitator and challenges
students’ views of reality by introducing disequilibrium with incongruent
factual or theoretical material.
The teacher further guides students through problem solving
activities and reviews and monitors students’ reflective and interpretive
thinking after they, the students, discover their researched findings. Experience consists of actual physical and
social encounters in which they deal with unexpected claims – either factual or
opinionated claims – and reflect on them, according to Scheurman.
As for Vygotsky’s strand of constructivism, Scheurman calls
it “social constructivism.” Scheurman
explains:
Accepting Piaget’s view of
how individuals build private understandings of reality through problem solving
with others, Vygotsky further explained how social or cultural contexts
contribute to a public understanding of objects and events. In this view, reality is no longer objective,
while knowledge is literally co-constructed by, and distributed among,
individuals as they “interact with one another and with cultural artifacts,
such as pictures, discourse, and gestures.”[4]
Within the social
constructivism view, teachers take on a collaborative role. That is, they participate with the students
in “constructing” reality.
By doing so, certain functions are met. These functions are to bring to light students’
misconceptions, to hold open-ended discoveries and inquiries, and to lead teachers
and students to real social resources and procedures. A class of students, including the teacher,
“creates” a reality by manufacturing a culturally based understanding,
conducting open-ended inquiries, and reflecting on the mutually constructed
meaning.
Constructivism promises to be a viable methodology for
teaching a communally based curriculum.
As Scheurman points out, it does not preclude other types of instruction
as functional components in preparing students for meaningful constructivist
lessons or reflective extensions to lessons that have had students construct
conclusions to a set of inquiries.
Already mentioned in the last posting, there are more
behaviorally based lessons which can be employed to establish needed
information. Also, inquiry type lessons
that can test claims or conclusions presented to students and are based on the
behavioral science model, can be conducted.
In other words, a healthy mix of modes of learning and teaching can add various
contributions toward viable civics instruction.
Perhaps here, as this account completes the description of
the commonplace, the subject matter, it is useful to provide a short review of
what has been presented. The account
first reviewed the assumptions of the liberated federalism construct regarding
individual decision-making. The account
then proposed a model of the liberated federalism model which is presented as
the preferred foundation for the study of government and civics at the
secondary level.
Then, using Eugene Meehan’s criteria, the model was
reviewed for its viability. Last, this
and the former posting looked at methodology as a contextual factor in
implementing the liberated federalism model.
In that, the presentation was in line with focusing on the more
interpretive approach of constructivism, i.e., it encourages more heuristic
approaches – in which students derive their own conclusions. In that, they avoid the claim that it promotes
indoctrination. Next, the blog will
address the commonplace, the student.
[1] For
readers who wish to review those corresponding postings and have not read them,
they are guided to this blog’s posting, “From Natural Rights to Liberated
Federalism” (June 2, 2023), at the URL, https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/,
where this series begins.
[2] Geoffrey Scheurman, “From Behaviorists to
Constructivist Teaching,” Social Education, 62, 1 (1998), 6-9.
[3] Ibid., 8.
[4] Ibid., 8.
No comments:
Post a Comment