sharing worldwide learning and research: informal, formal, individual and social learning, mobile, learning analytics, MOOC, AI, maker-based learning design... I love it, and combine it
Wednesday, 18 February 2009
Blogphilosophy rethinking educational methodologies: is constructivism indeed a solution for all regions?
The last couple of weeks I have been following a module of a Master in Distance Education at Athabasca University. This particular module focuses on the International issues that arise while developing distance education for different regions around the globe. It is moderated by Barbara Spronk, who seems to have traveled the world to such an extend that she does qualify as a global citizen indeed.
So I have been learning a lot lately, but consequently blogposted less. I had to come to terms with what I would post, when to find time and if anyone might be interested. Then I remembered some of you who have been motivating me to write on eLearning as soon as it interests me and this topic I find indeed interesting:
is the constructivist methodology - that is so fiercely promoted by distance education as it is seen as more student-centered - indeed a good methodology to use throughout the world?
I feel very in favor of the constructivist learning approach (Jean Piaget has written about it, picture in post) and I have been writing about it on some occasions. But due to the course I am following now, I am beginning to doubt if this methodology is indeed fit for all regions, I think not.
When developing DE for low income countries, I had the tendency of looking at social media possibilities as well (if the technology could be used) and to look for a more student-centered approach. But if you go into a region - as an advisor or a tutor - and you promote any kind of DE methodology, inevitably it becomes not that particular communities plan, but someone else’s plan or strategy. As such DE could be perceived as pervasive in some cultures.
It might not be without meaning that DE and the methodologies allocated with it as being ‘successful methodologies’ are linked to DE was build in a region (lets say Northern countries), by those people that have followed education in that region and as such DE (the first DE) has the mark of that region on it. If I were to make an invention for myself, I bet it would provide to the needs and thinking of my community, but my invention might not necessarily be exportable to other communities. A person is build in her/his community and from that framework creativity and ideas emerge. To me the same thing is true for educational methodologies.
Let's look at some Asian countries were teacher-centered learning is more commonly accepted than student-centered learning. What do you do in such region if you are asked to be a provider? Do you go in and push the 'constructivist is good for DE'-agenda, or do you let others come up with a methodology they feel is better for them, although that methodology might not be 'ideal' in your experience as a DE advisor/teacher?
So my opinion is changing from a constructivist promoter to a belief that if DE is formed, constructed and implemented by tutors or knowledge persons within a community, DE can be more indigenous and better fitting the needs and believes of that community.
Does anybody have thoughts on this or experiences?
Well, it seems to me that what you are really asking is: are learning theories global, independent of culture, not defined by culture?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion learning theories arise from within a culture and the evolution of learning theories resembles the evolution in society.
(btw, I definitely agree that you should write on e-learning as soon as you are interested in a particular topic ;-) )
Thank you Linda, you put it very well! That is definitely a sentence condensed with wisdom.
ReplyDelete(and thanks for the motivation :-)
This is part of why I'm interested in the content module design I'd posted about on my blog. There are plenty of people who make content, who organize content and who use content, but the systems get in the way. So creating an adaptable content module and XML format with easy to use tools sounds like a good idea to me. It's getting the system out of the way of the job.
ReplyDeleteThis paper by Zhang (pages 50-61) discusses the effects of using "constructivist" technology in Chinese classrooms, especially when it contrasts with the predominant culturally established way of teaching, and how currently the Chinese Ministry of Education is trying to implement more constructivist teaching.
ReplyDeletePersonally I agree with Linda. Throughout the evolution of society different learning theories met best the learners' needs. Now is the time where transferred knowledge, knowledge that I just take over from an authority is neither sufficient to solve today's problems nor does it satisfy the learner her/himself.
Zhang, J. Cultural Adaptation of Technology and Learning Innovations in Asia: An Emergent View Proceedings of AERA 2007 Symposium on Global Perspectives on Technology as a Change Agent in Teaching and Learning, 2007, 50-61
hi Steven
ReplyDeleteXML is indeed a great way to work around the system. Thanks.
hi Ulrich, it is a great! paper. Really interesting perspectives, thank you so much. This gives a great idea of how pedagogical change can be done.
ReplyDeleteHi Ignatia;
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is that constructivism is a theory that can be relevant to different methods / pedagogy and to different cultures. I don't think of constructivism as a method.
For instance Piaget's work would imply that scientific concepts are not appropriate for preschool because the neurology is not ready to process that stuff.
Another constructivist insight is that new knowledge is built on existing knowledge and it is good for teachers to know the structure of their students existing knowledge before building new. One difficulty in cross cultural DE is understanding the existing knowledge structure of students.
Another constructivist insight (attributable to Lev Vygotsky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Vygotsky) is that learning begins in the social world. That is, you participate in doing things with other people before you completely understand and internalize that learning. Again, the difficulty in providing a social space in DE can be better understood through constructivism, the theory.
To summarize, constructivism is to me a theory that explains how people learn. What I hear you discussing is more method, and in fact constructivism as a theory points out many difficulties in method that might be a problem in cross-cultural DE.
hi Howard,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your very insightful thoughts, I gladly take your knowledge with me.
Interesting post. I think Hofstedes cultural dimensions are relevant: http://wilfredrubens.typepad.com/wilfred_rubens_weblog/2009/02/de-invloed-van-cultuur-op-opvattingen-over-leren.html (in Dutch)
ReplyDeleteThank you for the reference Ruben! They are indeed relevant.
ReplyDelete