Advertisement

Appraising Constructivism in Science Education

  • Peter Slezak
Chapter

Abstract

Two varieties of constructivism are distinguished. In part 1, the psychological or “radical” constructivism of von Glasersfeld is discussed. Despite its dominant influence in science education, radical constructivism has been controversial, with challenges to its principles and practices. In part 2, social constructivism is discussed in the sociology of scientific knowledge. Social constructivism has not been primarily concerned with education but has the most direct consequences in view of its challenge to the most fundamental, traditional assumptions in the philosophy of science and to the practice of science itself.

Keywords

Science Education Scientific Knowledge Scientific Theory Social Constructivism Knowledge Claim 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ashmore, M. (1993). The Theatre of the Blind: Starring a Promethean Prankster, a Phoney Phenomenon, a Prism, a Pocket and a Piece of Wood, Social Studies of Science, 23, 67–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Austin J. L. (1962) Sense and Sensibilia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes, B. (1981). On the Hows and Whys of Cultural Change, Social Studies of Science, 11, 481–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes, B. and Bloor, D. (1982). Relativism, Rationalism and the Sociology of Knowledge,” in M. Hollis and S. Lukes, eds., Rationality and Relativism, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 21–47.Google Scholar
  5. Barnes B., Bloor D. & Henry J. (1996) Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bloor, D. (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  7. Bloor, D. (1981). The Strengths of the Strong Programme, Philosophy of Social Sciences, 11, 199–213.Google Scholar
  8. Bloor, D. (1982). Durkheim and Mauss Revisited: Classification and the Sociology of Knowledge, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 13, 4, 267–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bloor, D. (1983). Wittgenstein: A Social Theory of Knowledge, New York: Columbia University Press,Google Scholar
  10. Bloor, D. (1991). Knowledge and Social Imagery, Second Edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Boden M. A. (1994) Piaget. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
  12. Boorse, C. (1975). The Origins of the Indeterminacy Thesis, Journal of Philosophy, 72, 369–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bunge, M. (1991). A Critical Examination of the New Sociology of Science, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 21, 4, 524–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cardellini L. (2006) The foundations of radical constructivism: an interview with Ernst von Glasersfeld. Foundations of Chemistry, 8: 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chomsky, N. (1969). American Power and the New Mandarins, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  16. Cobb P. (1994a) Constructivism in mathematics and science education, Educational Researcher, 23, 7, 4.Google Scholar
  17. Cobb P. (1994b) Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23, 7, 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collins, H.M. (1990). Artificial Experts: Social Knowledge and Intelligent Machines, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Collins, H.M. and Pinch, T. (1992) The Golem: What Everyone Should Know About Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Driver R., Asoko H., Leach J., Mortimer E. & Scott P. (1994) Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 7, 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Durkheim, E. and Mauss, M. (1903) Primitive Classification, translated and edited with introduction by Rodney Needham (1963), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ellerton, N. & Clements, M.A. (1991), Mathematics in Language: A Review of Language Factors in Mathematics Learning, Deakin University Press, Geelong, Victoria.Google Scholar
  23. Ernest P. (1995) Preface by series editor. In: E. von Glasersfeld, Radical Constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press, xi–xii.Google Scholar
  24. Forman, P. (1971). Weimar Culture, Causality and Quantum Theory 1918–1927, in R. McCormmach, ed., Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1–115.Google Scholar
  25. Fosnot, C.T. (1996), ‘Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning’. In C.T. Fosnot (ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice, Teachers College Press, New York, pp. 8–33.Google Scholar
  26. Frank, P. (1949). Modern Science and its History, New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  27. Frankfurt H. G. (2005). On Bullshit. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Fraassen B. van (1980) The Scientific Image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gale J. E. (1995) Preface. in L.P. Steffe & J.E. Gale eds., Constructivism in Education. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, xi–xvii.Google Scholar
  30. Gardner, H. (1987). The Mind’s New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  31. Gergen K. J. (1995) Social construction and educational process. In L.P. Steffe & J. Gale eds., Constructivism in Education. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 17–40.Google Scholar
  32. Giere, R. ed. (1992). Cognitive Models of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume XV, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  33. Gil-Pérez, D. et al., (2002). Defending Constructivism in Science Education, Science & Education, 11, 6, 557–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gieryn, T.F. (1982). Relativist/Constructivist Programmes in the Sociology of Science: Redundance and Retreat,” Social Studies of Science, 12, 279–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Glasersfeld E. von (1989) Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80: 121–140. available at http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/118
  36. Glasersfeld E. von (1993) Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In K. Tobin ed., The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence-Erlbaum, 23–38. Originally published in 1992. Available at http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/151
  37. Glasersfeld E. von (1995a) Radical Constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Glasersfeld E. von (1995b) a constructivist approach to teaching. in: Steffe L. P. & Gale J. (eds.) Constructivism in education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ: 3–16.Google Scholar
  39. Glasersfeld E. von (2001) The radical constructivist view of science. Special issue on “The impact of radical constructivism on science,” Part 1, edited by A. Riegler. Foundations of science, 6, 1–3, 31–43. Available at http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/pub/fos/ pdf/glasersfeld.pdf
  40. Gorman, M.E. (1992). Simulating Science: Heuristics, Mental Models and Technoscientific Thinking, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Gough, N.W. (1993). Laboratories in Schools: Material Places, Mythic Spaces, The Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 39, 29–33.Google Scholar
  42. Gross, P. and Levitt, N. (1994). Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and its Quarrels with Science, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kelly, G.J. (1997), ‘Research Traditions in Comparative Context: A Philosophical Challenge to Radical Constructivism’, Science Education 81(3), 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kirschner, P., Sweller, J. & Clark, R.E., (2006). Why Minimally Guided Learning Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Discovery Learning, Problem-Based Learning, Experiential Learning and Inquiry-Based Learning, Educational Psychologist, 41, 2, 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kitcher P. (2001) Real realism: The Galilean strategy. The Philosophical Review, 110, 2, 151–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Langley, P., Simon, H.A., Bradshaw G.L. and Zytkow J.M., (1987). Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Process, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Latour, B. (1983). Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World, in K. Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay, eds., Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, New York: Sage,Google Scholar
  50. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, 2nd Edition, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Laudan, L. (1981). The Pseudo Science of Science, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11. Reprinted in J. R. Brown, ed., (1984) Scientific Rationality: The Sociological Turn, Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  53. Laudan L. (1990a) Science & Relativism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Laudan, L. (1990b). Demystifying Underdetermination, In C. Wade Savage, ed., Scientific Theories, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XIV Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  55. Lehman, D. (1991). Signs of the Times: Deconstruction and the Fall of Paul de Man, New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  56. Mayer, R.E. (2004). Should there be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning? The Case for Guided Methods of Instruction, American Psychologist 59, 1, 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Matthews M. R. ed. (1998) Constructivism in science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht: Kluwer,.Google Scholar
  58. Matthews M. R. (2000). Appraising constructivism in science and mathematical education. In D.C. Phillips ed., Constructivism in Education: Ninety-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 161–192.Google Scholar
  59. Matthews, M.R.: 2012, ‘Philosophical and Pedagogical Problems with Constructivism in Science Education’, Tréma 38, 41–56.Google Scholar
  60. Merton, R.K. (1942). Science and Technology in a Democratic Order, Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1; reprinted as ‘Science and Democratic Social Structure,’ in his Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press, 1957.Google Scholar
  61. Merton, R.K. (1957). The Sociology of Knowledge, in his Social Theory and Social Structure, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  62. Meyer D. L. (2008) The poverty of constructivism. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41, 3, 332–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mills C. W. (1959) The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Munzel F. (2003) Kant on moral education, or “englightenment” and the liberal arts. The Review of Metaphysics, 57, 1, 43–73.Google Scholar
  65. Niaz, M., Abd-el-Khalick, F., Benarroch, A., Cardellini, L., Laburú, E., Marín, N., Montes, L.A., Nola, R., Orlik, Y., Scharmann, L.C., Tsai, C.-C. & Tsaparlis, G.: (2003), Constructivism: Defense or a Continual Critical Appraisal – A Response to Gil-Pérez et. al., Science & Education, 12, 8, 787–797.Google Scholar
  66. Nola R. (1998) Constructivism in science and science education: a philosophical critique. In M.R. Matthews ed. Constructivism in Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 31–60; originally published in Science & Education 6 (1997), 1-2, 55–83.Google Scholar
  67. Nola, R. (2003), Naked Before Reality; Skinless Before the Absolute: A Critique of the Inaccessibility of Reality Argument in Constructivism, Science & Education, 12, 2, 131–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Null, J.W. (2004), ‘Is Constructivism Traditional? Historical and Practical Perspectives on a Popular Advocacy’, The Educational Forum, 68(2), 180–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Olssen, M. (1996), ‘Radical Constructivism and Its Failings: Anti-realism and Individualism’, British Journal of Educational Studies 44, 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Orwell G. (1946) Politics and the English language. In The Penguin Essays of George Orwell.Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, (1984), 348–360.Google Scholar
  71. Papayannakos, D.P., (2008), Philosophical Skepticism not Relativism is the Problem with the Strong Programme in Science Studies and with Educational Constructivism, Science & Education, 17, 6, 573–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Perla, R.J. and Carifio, J. (2009) Toward a General and Unified View of Educational Research and Educational Evaluation, Journal of Multi Disciplinary Evaluation, 6, 11, 38–55Google Scholar
  73. Phillips, D. C. (1995) The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24, 7, 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Phillips, D. C. (1997a) How, why, what, when, and where: Perspectives on constructivism in psychology and education. Issues in Education, 3, 2, 151–194.Google Scholar
  75. Phillips, D.C. (1997b) Coming to Grips with Radical Social Constructivism, Science & Education, 6, 1–2, 85–104. Reprinted in M.R. Matthews ed. (1998) Constructivism in science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  76. Phillips D. C. ed. (2000) Constructivism in Education: Ninety-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  77. Piaget J. (1971) Biology and Knowledge. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Piaget J. (1972a) Insights and Illusions of Philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  79. Piaget J. (1972b) Psychology and Epistemology. Towards a Theory of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  80. Piaget J. (1999) The Construction of Reality in the Child. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  81. Pickering, A. (1992) Science as Practice and Culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Pinch, T.J. (1993). Generations of SSK, Social Studies of Science, 23, 363–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pinch T.J. and Collins, H.M. (1984). Private Science and Public Knowledge: The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of the Paranormal and its Use of the Literature, Social Studies of Science, 14, 521–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Popper, K.R. (1966). The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume 2, Hegel and Marx, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  85. Putnam H. (1994) Sense, Nonsense, and the Senses: An inquiry into the powers of the human mind. The Dewey Lectures at Columbia University, The Journal of Philosophy, 91, 9, 445–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Quale, A., (2007). Radical Constructivism and the Sin of Relativism, Science & Education, 16, 3–5, 231–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Quine W. V. (1960) Word and Object. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  88. Quine W. V. (1961a) Two Dogmas of Empiricism. In W.V. Quine, From a Logical Point of View. Second Edition. Harper, New York: 20–46. Originally published in 1951.Google Scholar
  89. Quine W. V. (1961b) Identity, Ostension, and Hypostasis. In W.V. Quine, From a Logical Point of View. Second Edition. New York: Harper, 65–79.Google Scholar
  90. Rorty R. (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Ruhloff J. (2001) The Problematic Employment of Reason in Philosophy of Bildung and Education, F. Heyting, D. Lenzen & J. Ponsford White eds., Methods in Philosophy of Education. London: Routledge, 57–72.Google Scholar
  92. Shapin, S. (1979). Homo Phrenologicus: Anthropological Perspectives on an Historical Problem, in B. Barnes and S. Shapin, eds., Natural Order: Historical Studies of Scientific Culture, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  93. Shapin, S. (1982). History of Science and Its Sociological Reconstructions, History of Science, 20, 157–211.Google Scholar
  94. Shotter J. (1995) In Dialogue: Social Constructionism and Radical Constructivism. In L.P. Steffe & J. Gale eds. Constructivism in Education. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 41–56.Google Scholar
  95. Slezak, P. (1989). Scientific Discovery by Computer as Empirical Refutation of the Strong Programme, Social Studies of Science, 19, 563–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Slezak, P. (1991a). Bloor’s Bluff: Behaviourism and the Strong Programme, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 5, 3, 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Slezak, P. (1991b). Review of Collins’ Artificial Experts, Social Studies of Science 21, 175–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Slezak P. (1994a) The sociology of science and science education. Part 1. Science & Education, 3, 3, 265–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Slezak P. (1994b) Laboratory life under the microscope: The sociology of science & science education. Part 2. Science & Education, 3, 4, 329–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Slezak, P. (1994c). The Social Construction of Social Constructionism, Inquiry, 37, 139–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Slezak P. (1997) Review of Barnes, Bloor & Henry: scientific knowledge: a sociological analysis. Metascience – New Series, 11: 44–52.Google Scholar
  102. Slezak P. (2000) Radical social constructivism. In D.D. Philips ed., National Society for the Study of Education (NSSE) Yearbook. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 283–307.Google Scholar
  103. Slezak P. (2007) is cognitive science relevant to teaching? Journal of Cognitive Science, 8, 171–205.Google Scholar
  104. Slezak, P. (2010). Radical constructivism: epistemology, education and dynamite, Constructivist Foundations, 6, 1, 102–111.Google Scholar
  105. Small, R. (2003), ‘A Fallacy in Constructivist Epistemology’, Journal of Philosophy of Education 37(3), 483–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Sokal A. & Bricmont J. (1997) Intellectual Impostures. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  107. Steffe L. P. & Gale J. (eds.) (1995) Constructivism in education. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey: Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  108. Stove, D. (1991) The Plato Cult and Other Philosophical Follies, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  109. Suchting, W.A.: 1992, ‘Constructivism Deconstructed’, Science & Education, 1, 3, 223–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Tobin, K.: 1991, Constructivist Perspectives on Research in Science Education, paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  111. Tobin K. (ed.) (1993) The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  112. Tobin, K. (2000), ‘Constructivism in Science Education: Moving On’. In D.C. Phillips (ed.) Constructivism in Education’, National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago, pp. 227–253.Google Scholar
  113. Tobin K. & Tippins D. (1993) Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin ed., The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence-Erlbaum, 3–21.Google Scholar
  114. Tweney, R., Doherty, M.E. and Mynatt, C.R. eds., (1981). On Scientific Thinking, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Woolgar, S. (1988). Science: The Very Idea, London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  116. Woolgar, S. ed. (1988). Knowledge and Reflexivity, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  117. Zammito, J.H. (2004). A Nice Derangement of Epistemes, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations