Beware the Reform-y Types in Constructivist’s Clothing
There’s been a great way to teach out there in school-o-sphere for quite some time, which we know leads to authentic learning and happy kids. It’s not lecture. It’s not worksheets. It’s not even “hands-on.” (“Hands-on” doesn’t always mean that kids are learning or even engaged.)
There have been critics along the way, just like there are with everything. Some suggest that if you allow kids to construct meaning, they’ll come up with outlandish ideas that don’t fit the scenarios or problems. I say, fine! Let them make up silly ideas! It helps start the thinking process towards more logical ones. And–and this is a big AND–it keeps the creativity in tact, without adults knocking it down before 5th grade.
The education reform we’re seeing now, sitting on top of the trash heap we call the Common Core State
Put that away and get back to hands-on learning!
It’s called constructivism, and it is totally awesome. Seriously, though, it is! When we hear the buzzwords, like “child-centered,” “inquiry-based,” “student-led,” etc., what we are hearing is an attempt to get kids to lead their own learning path and construct their own understanding. You know what happens when people construct meaning from their own learning? They remember. They transfer. They apply.There have been critics along the way, just like there are with everything. Some suggest that if you allow kids to construct meaning, they’ll come up with outlandish ideas that don’t fit the scenarios or problems. I say, fine! Let them make up silly ideas! It helps start the thinking process towards more logical ones. And–and this is a big AND–it keeps the creativity in tact, without adults knocking it down before 5th grade.
The education reform we’re seeing now, sitting on top of the trash heap we call the Common Core State