Adoption Of Constructivist Approach To Foster Creativity

Adoption Of Constructivist Approach To Foster Creative

ADOPTION OF CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO PROMOTE CREATIVE AND CRITICAL THINKING IN LEARNERS Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Course Today’s job market demands that employees should possess advanced skills including but not limited to creative, problem-solving and critical thinking skills. Lack of appropriate skills has made it difficult for new employees to effectively adapt to demands of the ever-changing job market. Employers in many countries have criticized the existing educational system for failing to produce creative and innovative learners. In United States, different scholars and researchers have pointed out that the current education curriculum is designed in a manner that focuses on drilling students for examination purposes (Topolovcan & Matijevic, 2017).

Overemphasis on tests and examinations kills creativity and critical thinking in learners. Currently, there is ensuing debate among policy makers, researchers, as well as scholars with regard to whether constructivist perspectives can foster creativity in students. Some hold the view that constructivist approach is not a sure way to promote critical and creative thinking in learners whereas others strongly believe that constructivist perspectives can significantly enhance critical and creative thinking in students. The main idea of constructivism is that students perform an active role in building their own meaning (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). In this paper, I strongly support the view that constructivist approach fosters creativity and critical thinking in students.

Unlike behaviorist models of learning which help instructors to comprehend and influence the actions of students, constructivism models assist instructors to understand what the learners are thinking and to enrich the student’s thinking (Dunlosky et al., 2013). Constructivism is a learning model that puts emphasis on the way learners actively construct or create knowledge based on experiences. Constructivist approaches are divided into social constructivism and psychological constructivism. These two forms of constructivist models emphasize on individual’s thinking as opposed to the behavior of individuals. Some of the ways through which constructivist approaches promote creativity and critical thinking in learners are described below.

Psychological constructivism holds that an individual acquires knowledge through intellectually organizing and reorganizing fresh experiences or information. Generally, organization occurs partially by associating fresh experiences with past knowledge that is already well known and meaningful. The individual constructivism is often associated with John Dewey, a famous educational philosopher (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Dewey claimed that students actually learn mainly through constructing their own knowledge (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). As a result, Dewey proposed that instructors should modify the curriculum to match the prior interests and knowledge of students as much as possible.

According to Dewey, the curriculum could only be justified in an event that it fits the roles and activities that learners will likely have the moment they leave the education institutions (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Currently, the ideas of Dewey are actually progressive and innovative to majority of educators. In South Australia, current developments focus on constructivism as a theoretical foundation for improving education in government schools. SACSA (South Australian Curriculum Standards and Accountability) Framework, which will regulate development and implementation of curriculum in public schools for predictable future contains the constructivism theme. Jean Piaget’s cognitive theory is another example of psychological constructivism.

Piaget argued that learning is an interplay between two intellectual (mental) activities namely; assimilation and accommodation (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). By definition, assimilation refers to the interpretation of fresh knowledge with regard to prior ideas, information or concepts. For instance, a pre-school kid who already has a knowledge about bird might originally identify any flying body (including mosquitos, bees and houseflies) with the term bird. According to Piaget, something that is being passed to a new situation is not merely a behavior but an intellectual symbol for an experience or an object (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Generally, assimilation and accommodation function jointly.

Accommodation is the modification of past concepts in accordance to new experience or information (Sriwongchai, Jantharajit, & Chookhampaeng, 2015). For example, a pre-school child who originally generalizes the idea of bird to incorporate any flying body finally reviews the idea to include only specific forms of flying bodies like sparrows and robins, and not other objects like airplanes, butterflies or mosquitoes. Piaget posited that assimilation and accommodation operate in conjunction to enrich the thinking of a child and to build a cognitive equilibrium (Sriwongchai, Jantharajit, & Chookhampaeng, 2015). According to Piaget, cognitive equilibrium is a balance between dependence on previous knowledge and entry to fresh knowledge (Sriwongchai, Jantharajit, & Chookhampaeng, 2015).

In all situations, cognitive equilibrium includes an ever-growing range of intellectual symbols for experiences and objects. Each intellectual symbol is a schema. As per Piaget, a schema was not simply an idea but an expounded combination of actions, experience, and vocabulary associated with the idea (Sriwongchai, Jantharajit, & Chookhampaeng, 2015). For instance, a kid’s schema for bird encompasses not only the meaningful verbal information but also the experiences of kid with birds, conversation concerning birds, as well as pictures of birds. Over the time, the assimilation and accommodation regarding birds as well as flying bodies work together and the kid reviews and grows his or her vocabulary.

In addition, the child adds and memorizes relevant fresh deeds and experiences. The child progressively builds entire new schemata concerning mosquitoes, butterflies, birds, and other flying objects from the gained shared additions and revisions. Psychological constructivism concepts such as assimilation and accommodation provides students with an opportunity to learn new things or information from the existing knowledge (Sriwongchai, Jantharajit, & Chookhampaeng, 2015). Furthermore, Psychological constructivism allows students to extensively explore wide repertoire of knowledge. In these ways learner’s curiosity and creativity is encouraged and they develop problem-solving, as well as critical thinking skills.

Constructivist models promote establishment of healthy relationships between a student and other persons who regarded as more experienced and knowledgeable (Topolovcan & Matijevic, 2017). Social constructivism (sociocultural theory) as portrayed by certain educators and psychologists focuses on interactions and relationships between a student and other people with substantial knowledge and experience. Jerome Bruner is cited as the first psychologist to conceptualize social constructivism (Topolovcan & Matijevic, 2017). Bruner strongly believed that learners could typically acquire more knowledge than had been conventionally anticipated provided they were accorded proper resources and guidance (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013).

He referred this kind of support as instructional scaffolding. The competence, as well as the intelligence of students is enhanced when scaffolding is availed. Indeed, Bruner emphasized on offering guidance in appropriate manner and at right time to foster creativity and critical thinking in learners. In 1978, Lev Vygotsky, a Russian Psychologist, proposed ideas similar to those founded by Jerome Bruner (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013). The works of Vygotsky explored the way thinking of a novice or child is influenced by associations with individuals who are more experienced, knowledgeable and capable than the student.

Vygotsky argued that a child solving a new problem or learning a fresh skill can do better if he or she is accompanied and assisted by a more experienced person than when the child is handling the task lonely (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013). For example, an individual who has played minimal chess will likely contest against a challenger better if assisted by a competent chess player as opposed to when contesting against the challenger lonely. According to Vygotsky, the difference between assisted performance and solo performance is the zone of proximal development (ZPD). From the perspective of social constructivist, learning is considered as assisted or aided performance (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013).

Initially, the skill is found in the expert assistance during the process of learning. As long as the expert is competent and inspired to assist, then he/she organizes skills that allow the child to build new knowledge or perform crucial skills. In this scenario, the expert is just like the coach of footballer. The coach provides assistance and suggest techniques of practicing. However, the coach does not perform the real playing work himself or herself.

Progressively, through offering continued experiences conforming to child learner’s developing skills, the skilled coach enables the child to gain the knowledge or skills that initially existed only with the expert. Social constructivism emphasizes a greater direct obligation of the expert for enabling learning to be possible (Dunlosky et al., 2013). The expert must possess the skill and knowledge, and understand the way to organize experiences that allow students to acquire skill and knowledge themselves in easy and safe manner. Nonetheless, the expert helps fostering critical thinking and creativity to learners through arranging the content into manageable sections, offering appropriate and fruitful practice, providing the manageable sections in a logical manner, restoring the analyzed sections at the end of lesson, and to some extent associating the whole experience to skills and knowledge relevant to the student already.

Constructivist models demand students to be confident and active in themselves, as well as their capabilities (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). It is through confidence that the learners can acknowledge existence of gaps in their understanding or information, and take the risk of studying new forms of thinking. Students may feel susceptible with regard to accepting their ignorance to other individuals. Recent research shows that when the learners feel confident about their abilities and peers’ support, the learners are more likely to become active class members (Topolovcan & Matijevic, 2017). Constructivist approaches allow learners to develop confidence in their abilities and this instils creativity and critical thinking in them.

Although there is substantial evidence that constructivist models can foster creativity and critical thinking in learners, antagonists of this school of thought like behaviorist psychologists will argue that the constructivism relies greatly on mental process and it neglects the behavioral attributes which they claim are very crucial in learning. However, these allegations can be termed as baseless and thus cannot be substantiated. Behaviorists are out there to advance their school of thought rather than promoting creativity in learners. Nevertheless, studies have revealed that supporters of social constructivism appreciate the essence of setting in which learning takes place (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013).

In conclusion, the changes presented in today’s job market requires graduates to have relevant creative and critical thinking skills if they want to remain relevant in various professions. According to research, lack of creativity is making graduates to encounter challenges, specifically in solving problems related to time efficiency, risk taking and cost taking (Gilakjani, Lai-Mei, & Ismail, 2013). Constructivist approaches require students to be active and confident in their abilities (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). When students are confident of their abilities, they are able identify gaps in their knowledge and this increases their curiosity to learn new skills (Dunlosky et al., 2013). Consequently, I maintain that constructivism has the potential to foster creativity and critical thinking in learners. Insights from constructivist psychologists like Piaget, Bruner and Vygotsky clearly demonstrate how constructivist approaches can promote creativity, problem solving and critical thinking skills in leaners.

References

• Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70.
• Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58.
• Gilakjani, A. P., Lai-Mei, L., & Ismail, H. N. (2013). Teachers' use of technology and constructivism. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 5(4), 49.
• Sriwongchai, A., Jantharajit, N., & Chookhampaeng, S. (2015). Developing the Mathematics Learning Management Model for Improving Creative Thinking in Thailand. International Education Studies, 8(11), 77-87.
• Topolovcan, T., & Matijevic, M. (2017). Critical Thinking as a Dimension of Constructivist Learning: Some of the Characteristics of Students of Lower Secondary Education in Croatia. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(3), 47-66.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
• Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s theory. In C. M. Rickheit & B. Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive development research (pp. 1-26). Elsevier.
• Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard University Press.
• Gulistan, G., & Jamil, M. (2020). The Impact of Constructivist Teaching Strategies on Critical Thinking Skills of Students. Journal of Education and Learning, 14(2), 250-263.
• OECD. (2019). Education at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.