Why constructivists should not talk about constructivist learning environments: a commentary on Loyens and Gijbels (2008)

Renkl, Alexander

doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9098-5

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We find it difficult to disagree with several of the points made by Renkl (2009), given that we share the same view to a large extent. However, in this commentary we will explain that in our view, there is not necessarily a paradox when constructivists talk about constructivist learning environments.…”

contrasting

confidence: 66%

“…The link with the theory of constructivism is less straightforward using the term ''new'' and it seems to be more appropriate for the kind of learning environments and the kind of research questions that we advocate. We agree again with Renkl (2009) that research should focus on ''how to best induce active-sense-making and knowledge construction, irrespective whether the chosen learning environment is usually regarded as a ''traditional'' or a ''constructivist'' arrangement''.…”

Section: Meaningful Learning Is Also Possible Outside Constructivist mentioning

confidence: 53%

“…We agree with the claim that one ''cannot directly deduce from the basic constructivist assumptions of active sense-making and knowledge construction that so-called ''constructivist'' learning environments are superior to arrangements that are usually regarded as ''traditional''. What one can conclude is that in any type of (meaningful) learning environment, instruction should be designed in such a way that there is a high probability students will engage in active sense-making and knowledge construction'' (Renkl 2009).…”

Section: Meaningful Learning Is Also Possible Outside Constructivist mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Constructivist learning (environments) and how to avoid another tower of Babel: reply to Renkl

Gijbels

Loyens

2009

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

First of all, we would like to thank Alexander Renkl for taking the time to read and comment on our special issue on the effects of constructivist learning environments. Such responses indicate that our special issue has been successful in at least one of its goals: It has stimulated further debate about the nature and characteristics of constructivist learning (environments).We find it difficult to disagree with several of the points made by Renkl (2009), given that we share the same view to a large extent. However, in this commentary we will explain that in our view, there is not necessarily a paradox when constructivists talk about constructivist learning environments. In our opinion, it all depends on how one views and approaches constructivism and we will argue that three perspectives can emerge in this respect: A theory of learning, a philosophical position, and a theory of instruction.At the same time, we agree that the term ''constructivist learning environment'' might raise some false expectations. Other labels to refer to what we have called ''constructivist learning environments'' might be helpful in this respect, e.g., new learning environments or learning environments that foster meaningful learning.In our introductory article for the special issue, we clearly distinguished between constructivism as a learning theory and educational applications of this theory, i.e., constructivist learning environments (Loyens and Gijbels 2008, pp. 351-352). By making this distinction, we tried to keep theory and pedagogy apart. We concur with Renkl that educational applications such as the use of meaningful problems do not belong to the epistemological core of constructivism. In our view, however, introducing epistemology when discussing constructivism is adding a third perspective besides a theory of learning and a theory of instruction.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 66%

Section: Meaningful Learning Is Also Possible Outside Constructivist mentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Meaningful Learning Is Also Possible Outside Constructivist mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constructivist learning (environments) and how to avoid another tower of Babel: reply to Renkl

Gijbels

Loyens

2009

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As prior knowledge is one of the most important factors that influence future learning (e.g., Ausubel 1960;Dochy et al 1999;Loyens and Gijbels 2008;Renkl 2009), this transferred prior knowledge substantially defines what learners can learn from respective learning resources (see Schwartz et al 2007). For learners who have little to no prior knowledge in a domain, this implies that even very basic instruction (e.g., instructional explanations that communicate basic declarative knowledge; see Roelle et al 2014) might presuppose a level of prior knowledge that is not available to them (Schwartz and Bransford 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

Roelle

Berthold

2016

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparing contrasting cases is a promising means to prepare learners for future learning from related direct instruction. The most prevalent type of preparation intervention used in this case comparison approach is providing contrasting cases together with comparison prompts. However, if the contrasting cases are complex learners might need more guidance than mere prompts in order to detect their relevant similarities and differences and thus exploit their full potential. The inventing approach entails having learners invent explanations that deal with the detected similarities and differences in addition to comparing contrasting cases. In this approach, however, it is unclear whether the generation of inventions per se has an added value to the concomitant detection of similarities and differences. Against this background, in a 2 9 2 factorial experiment with N = 80 eighth-grade students we varied the preparation intervention the learners received before they processed some instructional explanations according to: (a) type of task while comparing contrasting cases (responding to a comparison prompt vs. verifying provided comparisons), and (b) inventing task after comparing contrasting cases (with vs. without). We found that if there was no invention task, the learners who verified the provided comparisons learned more from the instructional explanations than those who received a comparison prompt. Requiring learners to generate inventions only after comparing the cases yielded differential results. The learners who detected only one similarity or difference among the cases benefitted from the inventing task, whereas the learners who detected all of the relevant features were hindered by it, albeit marginally.

show abstract

“…Además, busca proyectar un espacio que propicie la formación integral y que se distingue, por una parte, en una formación propia, auténtica, con sello y a su vez, con las demandas sociales y en un marco de convergencia con otras entidades de educación superior (UDA, 2012). El Modelo Educativo Universidad de Atacama es por definición un ambiente educativo centrado en el estudiante (Asún, Zúñiga y Ayala, 2013); se requiere por parte del mismo del aprendizaje activo y significativo, a través de una actitud, comportamiento e interpretación activa y profunda de la información de estudio seleccionada (Renkl, 2009). Los modelos centrados en el estudiante declaran la importancia de promover la adopción de estilos de aprendizaje significativo y estudio profundos, con el propósito de lograr congruencia con las demandas que por definición exigen este tipo de ambientes educativos (Struyven et al, 2006); en pos del subsecuente éxito académico esperado.…”

unclassified

Efecto de la Motivación sobre la Profundidad en los Procesos de Estudio en Universitarios de Formación en Pedagogía

Salgado¹,

Leria²,

Franco³

et al. 2017

reice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why constructivists should not talk about constructivist learning environments: a commentary on Loyens and Gijbels (2008)

Cited by 23 publications

References 10 publications

Constructivist learning (environments) and how to avoid another tower of Babel: reply to Renkl

Constructivist learning (environments) and how to avoid another tower of Babel: reply to Renkl

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

Efecto de la Motivación sobre la Profundidad en los Procesos de Estudio en Universitarios de Formación en Pedagogía

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About