I've been doing some thinking about constructivism and constructivist teaching. I've also been doing some talking with classmates. I've been doing this because constructivist teaching still confuses me... the topic and the practice. I think, perhaps, that I am a bit more concrete-sequential than I originally thought. I don't think I was always that way, but I think I've gradually moved a little in that direction. Let me explain.
I've been rolling over the Power Point assignment in my mind for a week now. I "get" the assignment on a basic level. I struggle, though, with the non-linear requirement. As someone who has never used Power Point in that manner, it is difficult to conceptualize. I realize that the assignment was designed that way purposely. I'm going to have to get in there and muck around with Power Point to figure out technically how to do that. I have no problem with that. I love mucking around in something. What is making me, I confess, a little nervous is the organization of the information. As in any true constructivist experience, I've really got to know and understand my subject matter to create a non-linear presentation/construction of it. The idea that there is no one there saying, "first do this, next do this," etc is more than a little scary. I have relied for so long on others feeding me info and steps, I realize that I've stopped thinking. Starting to think again is exciting but also unnerving. What if I'm bad at this? What if I don't know as much as I think? This could be very daunting for students, especially those who are concrete-sequential processors. Constructivism seems, almost by nature, to be a very abstract-random process.
I guess I'm wondering how other people see it. Is constructivism more concrete-sequential or abstract-random? Does that distinction change how we think about it? If so, how does the thinking change?
I'm still not sure about this, so I'm going to take this up this week as well and will be back next week with hopefully deeper understanding.
Til then....
This blog was established as a requirement for an educational technology course at the University of Minnesota. It is now a combination of personal posts and posts related to my Masters coursework at the University of Minnesota.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
Labels
A Long Way Gone
(1)
academic writing
(1)
analysis
(1)
annotating
(1)
Apple
(1)
audacity
(2)
blogs
(2)
bubbl.us
(1)
censorship
(1)
classroom environment
(1)
cllecting
(1)
comics
(1)
course management
(1)
creative writing
(2)
credibility
(1)
Diigo
(1)
District 112
(1)
editing
(1)
education
(8)
education technology Prezi
(1)
education technology research wiki vlog
(1)
education technology wiki theater novels "creative writing"
(1)
family
(1)
film
(1)
flickr
(1)
forum
(1)
GarageBand
(1)
Glee
(1)
Glogster
(1)
Google
(1)
Google Docs
(1)
graphic novels
(1)
ideas
(1)
learning
(1)
lesson plan
(5)
Maus
(1)
media literacy
(6)
media studies
(1)
mind map
(1)
monologues
(1)
Moodle
(1)
Muppets
(1)
news
(1)
OneNote
(1)
oral interpretation
(2)
Persepolis
(1)
personal
(1)
podcasting
(2)
presentations
(1)
rationale
(1)
readability
(1)
representations
(2)
Romeo and Juliet
(2)
RSS
(1)
search engines
(1)
slideshow
(1)
speech
(2)
sports
(1)
synchronous chat
(1)
Tales of a Fourth grade Nothing
(1)
teaching
(1)
technology
(1)
Television Without Pity
(1)
theater
(2)
validity
(1)
video
(1)
vocal variety
(2)
webquest
(1)
websites
(1)
wikis
(1)
Will Schuester
(1)
writing
(1)
writing feedback theater rubric digital
(1)
1 comment:
I am thinking the general view of constructivisum is more in line with the abstract-random line of thought. However, with the use of tools to construct knowledge, the function and basic use of the tools has to be taught. I think that is where the concrete-sequential comes into play. Or, really, is this just me constructing a framework for an answer to your question?
Post a Comment