The Benefits of an Engaged Constructivist Pedagogy in the Sciences

• In Event: Curriculum Theory and the Disciplines

Proposal Description

Science education is typically characterized by some combination of lecture and lab. The integration of an engaged pedagogy and a constructivist approach work well with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), which call for the use of project based learning.

Within NGSS, there is a shift toward project based learning, improved science pedagogical knowledge, inquiry science, and educators teaching core science with an emphasis on integrated instruction. NGSS include new areas of study intended to be woven into the curricula, and for the first time, all science teachers are asked to cover topics across their subject areas that apply concepts in climate change, earth and space sciences, and engineering (Pruitt, 2014).

Integrated science is not a new concept, however; the adoption of the NGSS mandate teachers help students be productive 21st century citizens by developing an integrated understanding of the big ideas in science to allow them to problem solve and explain their ideas (Fortus & Krajcik, 2011). While applicable to multiple subjects, it specifically applies to science because everything in the natural scientific world is interconnected. Lessons allowing for movement across science disciplines allow the teacher flexibility in their own project based lesson design that can spur students’ enhanced cognition (Ertmer, 2014). With goals of students who understand the role of science in society and acquainted with evolving global and local challenges and methods, the use of an engaged constructivist pedagogy aligned with creating lessons intertwining multiple sciences gives students interdisciplinary strategies for complex problem solving, critical thinking, and leadership skills (Begg, Galea, Bayer, Walker, & Fried, 2014).

This integrated form of science aligns with engaged pedagogy (XYX & XXX, 2014; XXX et al., 2015), which integrates student connection and relationships (Bishop & Berryman, 2006), democratic practices (Dewey, 1916; Sehr, 1997) and student centered learning (Dewey, 1916). It should also include: creativity (Eisner, 2002), higher level thinking skills (Bloom, 1956), multiple modalities (Gardner, 1983), diversity (Guisbond et al., 2006), and student voice (hooks, 1994; Nieto, 2005).

Building out of an engaged pedagogy includes the use of constructivism in the sciences (Tobin, Tippins, & Gallard, 1994). In order to encourage meaningful learning, science education focuses largely on conceptual change to redirect student misconceptions towards more scientifically appropriate explanations (Demastes, Good, & Peebles, 1995). This can be achieved through constructivist methodologies, which emphasizes the ability to construct a concept as dependent on an individual’s ability to create and evaluate different propositions (Tobin et al., 1994).

Teachers are important in aiding students to reorganize their thinking by providing them with situations that pressure them towards “better-adapted thought processes” (Lawson, 1994, p. 139). Ultimately, the restructuring of cognitive frameworks must come from the student, thus the constructivist nature of this theory; nevertheless the teachers serve an important role. Students can internalize new concepts if they are prompted to engage their previous views and then given the opportunity to experience and analyze a situation, which promotes accommodation allowing for assimilation of new ideas (Lawson, 1994).


References
Begg, M. D., Galea, S., Bayer, R., Walker, J. R., & Fried, L. P. (2014). MPH education for the 21st century: Design of Columbia University's new public health curriculum. American Journal of Public Health, 104(1), 30-36. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301518
Bishop, R. S., & Berryman, M. (2006). Culture speaks: Cultural relationships and classroom learning. Wellington: Huia Publishers.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals (1st ed.). New York: Longmans, Green.
Demastes, S. S., Good, R. G., & Peebles, P. (1995). Students' conceptual ecologies and the process of conceptual change in evolution. Science Education, 79(6), 637-666.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company.
XYX, X. X., & XXX, X. X. (2014, April 25, 2014). Engaged pedagogy: the classroom as an active learning environment. Paper presented at the Student Success Summit, Irvine, CA.
Eisner, E. W. (2002). The kind of schools we need. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 576-584.
Ertmer, P. A. (2014). The grand challenge: Helping teachers learn/teach cutting edge science via a PBL appraoch. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning., 8(1), 1-18.
XXX, X. X., Stockbridge, K., XYX, X. X., Evensen, C. A., Maghzi, K. S., Pearson, H., & Cuddy, E. (2015). Mapping joyful teaching and learning: Multiple perspectives in an active, collaborative learning environment. CCNews: Newsletter for the California Council on Teacher Education, 23(4), 23-26.
Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Curriculum coherance and learning progressions. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 783-798). Netherlands: Springer.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Guisbond, L., Dunphy, P., Johnson, J., Kaplan, K., Neill, M., Segal, M., . . . Valentine, L. (2006). The campaign for the education of the whole child. A report from the Alliance for the Education of the Whole Child. Boston, MA: Alliance for the Education of the Whole Child.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge.
Lawson, A. D. (1994). Research on the acquisition of science knowledge: Epistemological foundations of cognition. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 131-176). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Nieto, S. (2005). Why we teach. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Pruitt, S. (2014). The next generation science standards: Features and challenges. Journal of science teacher education, 25(2), 145-156.
Sehr, D. T. (1997). Education for public democracy. New York, MY: State University of New York.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D.J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 45-93). New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.

Authors

• Marni Elizabeth Fisher, Chapman University

• Sabina Giakoumis, University of California, Irvine

• Meredith A. Dorner, Irvine Valley College