Abstract
While constructivism has made a considerable mark concerning learning in many areas of school learning, much less is evident relating to the education and professional development of teachers. This paper not only deals with the implementation and evaluation of such a constructivist course, but extends the argument towards the induction of teachers into “critical constructivism” through their own action research projects. Data is drawn from a single case study which illuminates the induction process and illustrates the changes taking place in the professional life and the reflective practice of one teacher as she deals with scientific concepts with two classes of 11–15 and 18–25 year olds. The Brazilian setting for the course lends resonance to its international significance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alsop, S. J., & Watts, D. M. (in press). Sources from a Somerset village informal learning about radiation and radioactivity.Science Education.
Arib, M. A., & Hess, M. B. (1986).The construction of reality. Cambridge University Press.
Baird, J., & White, R. (1993).The PEEL Project. Melbourne: Monash University.
Bastos, H. F. B. N. (1992).Changing teachers’ practice: Towards a constructivist methodology of physics teaching. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Bell, B. (1993).Taking into account students’ thinking: A teacher development guide. Hamilton: Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato.
Bell, B. (1991). Implications for Curriculum. In J. Northfield & D. Symington (Eds.),Learning in science viewed as personal construction: An Australian perspective (pp. 25–31). Key Centre Monograph Number 3. Perth: Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics, Curtain University, Australia.
Bell, B., & Gilbert, J. K. (1996).Teacher development: A model from science education. London: Falmer Press.
Carmichael, P., Driver, R., Holding, B., Phillips, I., Twigger, D., & Watts, D. M. (1990).Research on students conceptions in science: A bibliography. Leeds: Leeds Children’s Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds.
Clark, C. M., & Petersen, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed) (pp. 255–295). New York: Macmillan.
Day, C., Calderhead, J., & Denicolo, P. (1993).Research on teachers’ thinking. Understanding professional development. London: Falmer Press.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985).Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science.Studies in Science Education, 13, 139–147.
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1995).Making sense of secondary science. London, Routledge.
Fensham, P., Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1994).The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (1st ed.). London: The Falmer Press.
Freire, P. (1972).Pedagogy of the oppressed. (Translated (from Portuguese) by Myra Bergman Ramos). London: Sheed and Ward.
Gilbert, J. K., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions.Studies in Science Education, 10, 67–98.
Hand, B., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). Teachers’ thoughts about changing to constructivist teaching/learning approaches within junior secondary science classrooms.Journal of Education for Teaching, 20(1), 97–112.
Hawkins, D. (1994). Constructivism: Some history. In P. Fensham, R. F. Gunstone, & R. T. White (Eds.),The content of science. A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 9–13). London: Falmer Press.
Jofili, Z. (1997).Changing teachers’ thinking. Cases from science education. Unpublished PhD, Roehampton Institute, London, UK.
Jofili, Z., & Watts, D. M. (1995). Changing teachers’ thinking through critical constructivism and critical action research.Teachers and Teaching Theory and Practice, 1(2), 213–228.
Kelly, G. A. (1955).Personal construct psychology. Norton Press NY.
Kincheloe, J. (1991).Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. London: The Falmer Press.
Kincheloe, J. L. (1993).Towards a critical politics of teacher thinking. Mapping the postmodern. London: Bergin and Garvey.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1981).The manufacture of knowledge. London: Pergammon Press.
Lowe, D. (1982).The history of bourgeois perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mathews, M. (1994).Science teaching. London: Routledge.
Northfield, J., & Symington, D. (Eds.). (1991).Learning in science viewed as personal construction. An Australian perspective. Key Centre Monograph Number 3, Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University, Australia.
Ogborn, J. (1995). Recovering reality.Studies in Science Education, 25, 3–38.
Pedler, M. (1983).Action learning in practice. Aldershot: Gower Publishing.
Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1994).Bibliography: Students alternative frameworks and science education (IPN Reports in Brief). Kiel, Germany: University of Kiel.
Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Eds.) (1986).Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Roth, W.-M. (1995).Authentic school science. London: Kluwer Academic.
Vaz, A., & Watts, D. M. (1996). A clash of cultures: Physics and the primary scientist.Primary and Early Childhood Development, 117, 99–112.
von Glaserfeld, E. (1984). Introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick (Ed.),The invented reality: How do we know what we believe we know? (pp. 87–98). New York: Norton.
Walker, R. (1993). The conduct of educational case studies: Ethics, theory and procedures. In M. Hammersley (Ed.),Controversies in classroom research (2nd ed) (pp. 163–195). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Watts, D. M., & Bentley, D. (1991). Constructivism in the curriculum. Can we close the gap between the strong theoretical version and the weak version of theory-in-practice?The Curriculum Journal, 2(2), 171–182.
Watts, D. M., & Vaz, A. (in preparation). Problem based learning: Problem posing, problem solving and the process of problematisation.
Watzlawick, P. (1984). (Ed).The invented reality: How do we know what we believe we know? (pp. 87–98). New York: Norton.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Watts, M., Jofili, Z. & Bezerra, R. A case for critical constructivism and critical thinking in science education. Research in Science Education 27, 309–322 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461323
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461323