education

What is Special Education? 1

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Pre-Test

1. You can use the terms disability and handicap interchangeably. T/F 2. The history of special education began in Europe. T/F 3. The first American legislation that protected students with disabilities was passed in the 1950s. T/F 4. All students with disabilities should be educated in special education classrooms. T/F 5. Special education law is constantly reinterpreted. T/F

Answers can be found at the end of the chapter.

3How Students Learn

Digital Vision/Digital Vision/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to

• Articulate why teaching is both an art and a science.

• Describe behaviorism and identify teacher applications.

• Compare and contrast cognitivism with behaviorism.

• Describe constructivism’s theoretical underpinnings.

• Contrast constructivism with traditional instruction.

• Explain the theory of multiple intelligences and its importance within an academic setting.

Section 3.1The Art and Science of Teaching

Children are the last candid audience left. They don’t care what the critics say and they let you know immediately what delights and what bores them.

—Gian Carlo Menotti, Composer

Teachers play numerous roles in schools; however, their principal role is to provide instruc- tion so students can learn. Effective teachers continually look for optimal ways to deliver instruction to students. In this chapter, we will examine a few major learning theories to pro- vide a conceptual framework with which to compare our ideas about how students learn. A learning theory explains and makes predictions about human acquisition of knowledge. The primary purpose for developing theories is to make sense out of complicated phenomena in an effort to identify ways to handle human problems. A learning theory, then, provides a framework to test hypotheses about human behavior, and researchers strive to describe, explain, and predict outcomes in any given situation.

When teachers are deciding how to deliver instruction most efficiently and effectively, their decisions are usually affected by such learning theories and their own ideas about how stu- dents learn. Many teachers today, for example, are heavily influenced by the theories of con- structivism and multiple intelligences, both of which will be discussed in this chapter. Yet, some of those same teachers will be influenced by the more traditional approaches to educa- tion that they grew up with. We will discuss those too.

As you can imagine, there are many theories and models from which to choose. You will find, however, that no single theory or model can adequately explain the complexities of human learning. It is the case, in fact, that experienced teachers might well have a favorite theory, yet find themselves combining and applying it with other theories when a specific teaching- learning situation arises. Every instructional approach has both strengths and limitations. In the final analysis, there are numerous variables to consider when deciding which model to use. Should you become a teacher, you must be willing to experiment with a variety of approaches to maximize learning.

You likely already have views about how people learn; this chapter is designed to help you clarify and refine those beliefs. Regardless of what those beliefs are, they will affect the kind of instruction you will provide should you become a teacher.

3.1 The Art and Science of Teaching Up until now, you have likely viewed teaching only from the perspective of a student. Your perceptions of what teachers do primarily come from your experience as a recipient of knowl- edge. The collection of experiences you have had with past teachers influences your beliefs about teaching and your actual practices. From the vantage point of a student, teaching may appear relatively easy. In fact, many people who have never taught may hold this mistaken point of view. On the contrary, teaching is very demanding; teachers make hundreds of deci- sions each day, and many decisions are made on the spot.

For example, when teachers are planning for classroom instruction, they must decide what to teach, how to teach, whom to teach, and how to assess student learning. To a great extent,

Section 3.1The Art and Science of Teaching

these decisions will be based on the philosophies of teaching held by the teachers, their school and district administrations, and possibly the parents. Teachers whose philosophy of teaching is based on critical pedagogy and the high value it gives to educating for a just society will no doubt make lesson plans that differ from those of teachers who are more focused on meeting the demands of high-stakes testing that come with federal and state legislation.

Teachers must also make a number of decisions in the course of their classroom interac- tions with students. In fact, “teachers make somewhere between 800 and 1,500 decisions every day” (Kauchak & Eggen, 2005, p. 55)! Lesson plans must be perceived as tentative, because considerations such as weather, students’ moods, and other factors can result in a swift change in plans. Teachers must monitor and adjust classroom conditions to accommodate these changes. The quintessential question while teaching is “What shall I do now?” Other questions raised by the teacher at this time may include “Am I being clear enough?” “How could I explain this concept more fully?” “Should I give this handout now or wait until the end of the lesson?” “How can I increase students’ interest and partici- pation?” The list of decisions goes on as the dynamics within the classroom change. The immediacy of classroom action demands responsiveness and spontaneity on the part of the teacher.

Finally, after their time in the classroom, teachers must decide what they will do in the future by recalling their lessons and assessing outcomes: What worked? What did not work? Why or why not? Only by asking such questions can teachers modify and improve their practices. A teacher might also engage in abstract and hypothetical thinking, considering alterna- tive methods for the next time. The teacher asks, “What would have happened if I had used another approach?”

All this decision-making likely seems daunting: How does one determine what is best for students? How do students learn? Which teacher behaviors produce better outcomes with which students and under what circumstances? The good news is that many scholars have made significant contributions to the professional literature, giving us an empirical body of knowledge from which to operate. Researchers have developed learning theories and models that attempt to answer these questions.

However, aspiring teachers must also recognize that teaching is fraught with ambiguity. There are many things that teachers do that cannot be studied systematically or explained definitively. These attributes are qualitative, not quantitative; thus, they defy measurement. Although we cannot precisely define or validate these subjective qualities, we can experi- ence them. Think about your schooling experience. Can you identify those teachers who were “naturals” at teaching? They had the ability to teach you when you least expected it; learning seemed to happen like magic. You found yourself stimulated by what was transpiring in their classroom, and abracadabra, you were hooked on the subject. You were captivated by their charm; you were swept into their learning web. These dynamic teachers probably found life intriguing, learning exciting, and people fascinating. Their zest for living spilled spontane- ously over into the classroom.

This gets at a debate often heard in the education field: Is teaching an art or a science? Some warn against applying the scientific method to humans—because human interac- tions are beyond cause-and-effect manipulations. Others, however, argue that teaching

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

practices must be studied scientifically; teachers should be schooled in principles derived from empirical studies.

This text takes the position that teaching is both an art and a science. Any artistic work is open to various interpretations depending on the person viewing it. A group of people can look at a painting, read a poem, or hear a song and have varying interpretations of what the artist intended. This same ambiguity also characterizes teaching. One purpose of the Assess Yourself questions in this textbook is to point out that many situations you will face or issues that you will deal with do not have conclusive answers. Thus, teachers must be able to deal with many problems and situations that do not have clear-cut solutions.

However, believing in the art of teaching should not preclude one’s desire to seek definitive answers to human problems. As a result of scientific inquiry, what was once simply prag- matic teacher training has, over the decades, become a more fully realized teacher education. Although this chapter will focus on theories and research about how students learn, this dis- cussion should also make you cognizant of the truly interrelated nature of the teacher as both scientist and artist.

Assess Yourself As you answer the following questions, provide concrete examples that support your reasoning:

1. Can you act quickly and think on your feet, or do you foresee trouble with the imme- diacy present in classroom interaction? Give examples of ways you can attend to sev- eral dynamics simultaneously in your daily life. How might you adapt those examples to the classroom?

2. Do you like to try new things, or do you tend to resist change? What are examples of new things you might need to try as a beginning teacher? How might they present a challenge to you?

3.2 Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model Behaviorism, a theory with a strong research base, seeks explanations for how organisms learn by observing behavior that can be measured. Behaviorists are interested in responses made by organisms as they interact with the physical environment. They contend that free will does not exist: Learning is a response to stimuli (objects or events), and behavior is shaped by one’s environment. Animal researchers Ivan Pavlov and Edward L. Thorndike and behavioral psychologist John B. Watson contributed greatly to the development of behavior- ism. However, it was B. F. Skinner who championed behaviorism’s application to education and whose work was the most influential in the teaching field. Skinner’s model of learning was called operant conditioning. Skinner (1953) found that reinforced behaviors are more likely to increase in frequency and duration. In contrast, ignored behaviors may decrease in frequency and strength. Thus, when students learn that certain responses are reinforced, they tend to increase those responses accordingly.

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

Imagine, for example, a second-grade class in which children earn gold stars on a chart each time they memorize a set of multiplication tables. In this sce- nario, the chart is the stimulus. Student answers are the response. As long as the students value gold stars (and most second graders do), the shiny tokens serve as a reward, or reinforcer. Providing such reinforcement will help ensure that more correct responses occur in the future. Notice that in this learning model, the student is the “operator” because he or she does something deliberate to elicit a desired response. Behaviorists some- times use the term instrumental learn- ing to describe this type of learning because the person (student) is instrumental in bringing about a desired outcome.

Operant conditioning can be contrasted with respondent conditioning, also known as classical conditioning, in which a neutral stimulus acquires the ability to elicit a conditioned response through association with an unconditioned stimulus. For example, an unconditioned stimulus such as a loud noise will automatically produce a startle response in most individuals. When the loud noise is paired with a bright light, the light will eventually acquire the ability to elicit a startle response. Teachers often find such classical conditioning useful as an approach to classroom management. For example, the teacher might move to the front of the room, briefly turn the lights off, and quietly say, “Please put all your books in your desk now.” After a few experiences with this technique, including the same light signal and verbal directions, chances are that the teacher can simply turn the lights off without saying anything. Students need only one of the two steps to know what they should do next.

Skinner was a vocal critic of the public education system of the 1950s, which he saw as both counterintuitive and counterproductive. In particular, he felt there was a lack of needed imme- diate feedback on student performance. He wrote numerous articles (later compiled into his 1968 work The Technology of Teaching) proposing various educational solutions, including a “teaching machine” that made it possible for students to work independently while the teacher could supervise any number of students at a time.

Physically, the machine was a simple wooden box of a size that would fit on a student desk. It contained only three workable parts: a slot from which emerged questions for the student to answer, another slot containing paper strips for writing answers, and a lever for scoring answers and advancing to the next question if a correct answer had been given. To Skinner, important elements in the machine’s design included a carefully created sequence of ques- tions; immediate feedback to the student telling whether answers were right or wrong; and highly structured, incrementally difficult instruction.

The Skinner teaching machine marked the beginning of programmed instruction in American education. It might well be seen as an early version of online education and computer-assisted,

Rob Lewine/Tetra Images/Getty Images Behaviorism focuses on learned habits, clear expectations, and rewarded responses.

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

or computer-based, instruction (Spencer, 2014). Computer programs can reduce rather detailed information into manageable frames, and students’ responses to the stimuli pre- sented are immediately reinforced. Like the Skinner teaching machine, computer-assisted instruction allows students to work at their own pace and receive prompt and consistent feedback regarding performance.

Behaviorism in the Classroom The application of behavioral concepts to education (see Table 3.1) is known as applied behavior analysis (ABA), or behavior modification. To change student behavior, a teacher elic- its desirable behaviors by using positive or negative reinforcement (Skinner, 1953).

Positive reinforcement is the presentation of a pleasant stimulus after desired behavior to increase the likelihood of that response continuing to occur. The gold stars in the second- grade classroom are an example. Good grades can also provide positive reinforcement. It is important to remember that individuals respond subjectively to stimuli and that what is aver- sive or reinforcing to some may not be interpreted the same way by others. The key to suc- cessful positive reinforcement is to choose a reinforcer that will be appropriate for a specific student, or population of students. While grades might be appropriate for any age, gold stars lose their luster over time for older students.

Negative reinforcement is the removal of an unpleasant stimulus to increase the likelihood of desired responses. For example, every time Josh brings home a grade lower than a B, his mother lectures him about being irresponsible. As a result, Josh starts studying harder just to avoid hearing his mother harp on about how irresponsible he is.

Negative reinforcement is sometimes confused with punishment. Punishment is the pre- sentation of an aversive stimulus or the removal of a pleasant stimulus after an undesir- able response to decrease the likelihood of undesired responses in the future. Punishment always involves a decrease in undesirable behavior, while negative reinforcement involves an increase in a desired response. If a teacher adds extra math problems to a child’s home- work assignment because he acted up during math class, a stimulus has been added; the intent of the punishment is to decrease further misbehavior on the part of the student dur- ing math instruction. When a teacher takes away a student’s privileges, such as hall moni- toring, because he failed to do his homework, a stimulus is removed. In both cases, the purpose of the punishment is to decrease the likelihood of this student being delinquent again with homework.

It should be noted that Skinner was highly opposed to punishment, observing that it was more likely than not to be counter-productive. Using positive reinforcement is more effective in general. Teachers who subscribe to a behaviorist approach to education should provide students with appropriate learning experiences in a positive environment that reinforces cor- rect student responses.

Shaping is an operant learning technique used frequently by teachers to change stu- dents’ more complex responses. Reinforcement is provided whenever a student’s behavior approximates the target goal. In other words, the desired behavior is broken down into

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

discrete units, with each successive approximation of behavior reinforced until it achieves the overall behavioral goal. For example, a boy who has little interest in working with others is placed in a study team made up of sociable and patient students. At first, the boy might receive positive reinforcement whenever he makes eye contact or smiles at the other stu- dents in the group. This reinforcement might come from other students, who are coached to respond in positive ways to the boy. Or the teacher might add his own casual compliments. More praise might be given when the boy speaks up or actively participates in the study team. As the boy’s sociability continues to improve, he might eventually feel comfortable enough to take on a leadership role within the group. His leadership activities would also be positively reinforced. It is important to remember that shaping is a gradual process; behavior does not have to be perfect to be reinforced, as long as it progresses toward the overall goal.

One other product of behaviorism is social learning theory, sometimes referred to as observa- tional learning. In the 1940s, Miller and Dollard (1941) found that students learn by observ- ing and imitating models. Bandura (1977) noted that “most behavior is learned observa- tionally through modeling; by observing others one learns how new behavior is performed” (p. 22). Teachers’ behaviors represent models for students to emulate and learn. Modeling provides students with feedback; the goal is to expose students to positive role models so they can imitate appropriate behavior instead of inappropriate behavior. By modeling virtues such as honesty, justice, and openness, teachers can build character in their students. Table 3.1 summarizes the various learning models presented in this section and provides examples for each.

Table 3.1: Applications of behaviorism

Principle Description Example Analysis

Positive reinforcement

Provide a pleasant stimulus, or reinforcer, after a desired student behavior has occurred. By associating pleasant out- comes with certain behaviors, a student will more likely repeat those actions or similar ones. Look for opportunities to praise students for desirable behavior.

“Thank you, Jacob, for raising your hand before you answered the question.”

Behavior that increases: Raising one’s hand

Reinforcer: Praise

Negative reinforcement

Remove an unpleasant stimu- lus after a desired behavior has been exhibited. A student will likely increase a desirable response to escape an aversive stimulus.

“Anne, good job on that exam. I know you were pretty worried about it, but you studied hard and received an A.”

Behavior that increases: Studying

Aversive stimulus that was removed: Test anxiety/worry

In this scenario, the stu- dent studies to remove anxiety, which serves as an aversive stimulus.

(continued)

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

Principle Description Example Analysis

Punishment Provide negative consequences for undesirable behavior by either presenting or removing a stimulus in order to decrease the frequency of the unwanted behavior.

“Anne, because you did not clean out your desk as I requested, you will stay in at recess.”

Punisher: Losing recess time

Behavior that decreases: Keeping desk disorganized

Staying in at recess is a direct punishment and is designed to change future behavior for the better.

Shaping Reinforce any student response or effort that comes close to the desired behavior. A student is thus rewarded for effort expended toward the desired goal. Shaping approximations toward the goal is reinforcing, which encourages the student to keep trying.

“Well, Maria, that’s certainly a good intro- duction to your paper. I am looking forward to seeing where you go with that idea.”

Maria is complimented for effort that is not yet up to the expected goal but is still an improvement.

Feedback Give students specific informa- tion about their performance at scheduled times and within reasonable timeframes. Teacher feedback should be frequent and as close to the task as possible. When students finish a test, quiz, or worksheet, have the key available so they can have imme- diate feedback on the results; this permits students to know what they missed and how to avoid future errors.

“When you finish your test, you may come up to my desk, one at a time, to look at the answer sheet.”

Students need to know what the next step is for their learning. Also important is the immediate feedback that is provided by hav- ing the answer sheets available.

Evaluating Behaviorism Behaviorism is a teacher-centered approach: The teacher, rather than the student, is mainly responsible for student learning and is seen as the one most qualified for imparting knowl- edge to students. Behavioral principles appeal to many teachers because instruction can be broken down into discrete tasks that can be taught directly; furthermore, the results can be quantified more easily.

Advantages There are many advantages to using behavioral theory in the classroom. Such an approach is exceptionally useful for learning that has specified right and wrong answers. In terms of plan- ning, behaviorist approaches are highly efficient. Learning goals are carefully laid out in advance, providing clarity to learners. Corrective feedback is provided to students with immediacy so they always know what worked well and what didn’t before they can forget the details.

Table 3.1: Applications of behaviorism (continued)

Section 3.2Behaviorism: A Teacher-Centered Model

Many times, teachers use behavioral techniques to treat student misbehav- ior. By being clear about expectations and providing consequences for mis- behavior, students are taught which behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not. Recognizing the impact of associations, teachers also can strive to ensure that students’ experiences at school are positive and help avert any negative associations formed. For example, teaching students relaxation skills might help those individuals who suffer from test anxiety alleviate some of the fear they experience when tak- ing examinations.

Furthermore, behavioral techniques can be effective when teaching stu- dents self-control. Although behavior modification has been shown to be effective with stu- dents at any level, it is especially useful for those who are learning disabled. In this case, specific steps are taken to ensure that reinforcement is effective, such as making sure that the student understands why the behavior is a problem, modeling the appropriate behavior; join- ing in role-playing the expectations, and providing immediate feedback so that the student understands what went well or not so well and why. Positive reinforcement and shaping can improve learning, motivation, and conduct in most children regardless of age or ability.

Limitations However, behavioral learning has been criticized for its simplistic approach to teaching new skills and behaviors. Critics argue that much learning requires higher-order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Higher-order thinking must be acquired in context rather than in isolation. Thus, critics argue that learning reduced to a simple stimulus-response action overlooks the process of learning. Further, not all information can be compressed neatly into a few discrete steps (or frames), as behaviorists contend.

Another frequently cited limitation of behavioral theory has long been that it treats symp- toms of misbehavior (not causes); therefore, results are usually short term. Critics maintain that real changes in a child’s behavior demand an examination of underlying causes that must be identified and dealt with before permanent change can occur.

Lastly, a teacher who rigidly uses reinforcers to entice student learning may be inadvertently decreasing student motivation by rewarding a student for doing something that is intrinsi- cally satisfying. For example, a teacher might decide to provide rewards to students who fin- ish their math work on time. Many of the students, however, might enjoy the challenge that their current math program presents and have no need for rewards; in other words, they don’t need external reinforcement to motivate their behavior. Rewards might even annoy them or ultimately decrease their motivation. Also, students who are externally motivated may be dependent on reinforcers and refuse to work unless there is a known reward for doing so.

Amit Somvanshi/Thinkstock Classroom discipline practices have traditionally relied on punishment, although such an approach has been rejected by behaviorists and constructiv- ists alike.

Section 3.3From Cognitivism to Constructivism: A Student-Centered Model

The following true experience is a demonstration of both these points. A student teacher in a fourth-grade class found herself dismayed that the entire day seemed to be devoted to rewarding the students with pieces of candy for every job completed, every well- considered answer, and seemingly every bit of good behavior. The huge horde of candy, located in high cabinets above the classroom sink, threatened to come tumbling out each time a new bag was opened. Determined to let the students enjoy the rewards that come from engaging in interesting work, the student teacher—when it was finally her turn to take over the class—dispensed with the candy, sure that her lesson plans were fully engaging. The students, however, were so acclimated to their reward system that they absolutely refused to work without candy, and behavior management became an over- whelming problem for her.

Knowledgeable behaviorists would say that the root cause of the problem was an inap- propriate use of reinforcements on the part of the regular classroom teacher, and that edu- cators should use incentives sparingly and cautiously in an effort not to deter or inhibit learning.

3.3  From Cognitivism to Constructivism: A Student-Centered Model

Cognitivism, derived from cognitive psychology, is a learning theory that examines the intel- lectual and mental dimensions of learning. Cognitivism, as it evolved in the 1950s, was a move away from the narrow focus of behaviorism and toward understanding the complexities of human behavior by examining the mind’s internal processes. Whereas behaviorists focused on overt, observable behavior, cognitivists focused on “more complex cognitive processes such as thinking, problem solving, language, concept formation and information processing” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 48). The introduction of cognitive learning theory provided a con- ceptual framework to test hypotheses related to ways the mind processes information.

While behaviorists were interested in students’ purely physical behaviors when it came to learning, arguing that external behaviors indicated internal mental activity, other educators and psychologists believed that students were much more mentally active than this approach implied. Learning, according to cognitivists, was “concerned not so much with what learners do but with what they know and how they come to acquire it.” The learner was “viewed as a very active participant in the learning process” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 48). The focus for cognitivists, then, was less on the responses to stimuli and more on the mental activities that lead up to responses such as mental planning, goal-setting, and organizational strategies. These were thought more important and appropriate for explaining complex forms of learn- ing. As applied to teaching, cognitivists preferred to “emphasize making knowledge mean- ingful and helping learners organize and relate new information to existing knowledge in memory” (p. 50).

Cognitivism does share some attributes with behaviorism, however. They both emphasize the role that environmental conditions play in facilitating learning, and both view learning as something that happens to the student from the outside in. In regard to teacher behavior, both emphasize the importance of explanations, demonstrations, and examples to make lessons clear. Opportunities for practice and timely corrective feedback are also important.

Section 3.3From Cognitivism to Constructivism: A Student-Centered Model

Still, cognitivism represented a major step away from behaviorism and provided a richer and deeper view of human learning, as well as a base on which to build similar psychological theories and approaches to education. Constructivism, a subcategory of cognitivism, is yet another step away from behaviorism, both as a psychological model and as inspiration for teaching methodologies. Constructivism helps us connect the dots between how students learn and what strategies teachers might employ in the classroom to engage and access their students’ current and prior knowledge. The theory states that learning is a personal interpre- tation of the world, and learners create these interpretations based on their past and present experiences (Neo & Neo, 2009). This view of how learning takes place indicates the necessity of a different view of teaching. Ertmer and Newby (2013) describe the various theories in this way: “As one moves along the behaviorist–cognitivist–constructivist continuum, the focus of instruction shifts from teaching to learning, from the passive transfer of facts and routines to the active application of ideas to problems” (p. 57).

Although behaviorism and its application to teaching has much to recommend it, for 21st- century teaching and learning, constructivism is the theory that currently offers the most promise. From Chapter 1, recall the four Cs that contribute to 21st-century skills: collabora- tion, creativity, communication, and critical thinking. It can be seen that “the active applica- tion of ideas to problems” that defines constructivism according to Ertmer and Newby is more closely related to these skills than “the passive transfer of facts and routines” that defines behaviorism. For that reason, we will include an extensive explanation of constructivism’s theoretical elements and practical approaches to teaching. For now, however, we begin with a description of its history and two of the giants who created it: Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky.

Jean Piaget (1896–1980) Piaget, a Swiss psychologist, focused on the mental devel- opment of individuals and their ability to make meaning through experiences. Piaget thought that individuals derive meaning and knowledge by interacting with the world. He is best known for his work on human knowledge and spe- cifically on how children learn. Piaget believed that chil- dren learn best by interacting with their environment and other individuals.

A fundamental concept of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development is the schema, which can be thought of as a mental structure that helps us organize, interpret, and make sense of information. For instance, think of the term trip. Hearing the word likely conjures up different thoughts in your mind. Depending on your life experiences, you may get an image of a plane, luggage, car, hotel, or suitcase. The more we experience and learn, the more complex our sche- mas become. If the term trip changes to camping trip, the schema changes and expands. Perhaps now the image of a tent, campfire, RV, or trees comes to mind.

As children interact with their environment, they encounter new information; this new infor- mation builds and expands existing schemas. However, when new information conflicts with

Associated Press Jean Piaget was one of the founders of the constructivist approach to development and education.

Section 3.3From Cognitivism to Constructivism: A Student-Centered Model

old learning, an individual has essentially two choices. The new information is adapted either (1) by fitting the new learning into an existing schema (called assimilation) or (2) by chang- ing the original schema (called accommodation) (Piaget, 1954). According to Piaget, these internal processes of assimilation and accommodation provide balance (called equilibration) for the student. However, for real learning to occur, it is imperative to upset equilibrium, cre- ating conflict or discord (called disequilibrium).

A teacher’s job is to introduce new information or problems that contradict what students already know, forcing them to adapt by either expanding or changing existing schemas. As they engage in these processes, students build organized schemas that are then ripe for fur- ther expansion and change. To create disequilibrium, for example, teachers can design situ- ations that produce internal conflict for students. To illustrate, one teacher challenges the negative stereotypes held by some of her Caucasian students by bringing in guest speakers— specifically, she invites ethnic minorities into the classroom who can refute prejudicial beliefs and notions by speaking about their experiences, thereby giving students a glimpse of a worldview different from their own.

Through his observations of children, Piaget identified four stages of intellectual develop- ment, each distinguished by specific levels of mental processing. Each stage builds on the preceding one (children cannot skip a stage). Different types of learning are associated with each stage. The rate of progression through the stages varies with the individual, thus mean- ing that designated ages are only approximations.

• The first stage is the sensorimotor stage, which occurs between 0 and 2 years old. In this stage, children interact with their environment through physical actions, such as sucking, pushing, and grabbing. By age 2, the child can see simple relationships and understand basic symbols. These early interactions build children’s cognitive struc- tures about the world and how the world functions.

• The second stage is the preoperational stage, which occurs between the ages of 2 and 7. In this stage, children engage in repeated actions to grasp the concept of cause and effect because they cannot yet form abstract conceptions about the world and must have hands-on experiences and visual representations to form basic conclu- sions. Children learn language and how to manipulate symbols. Symbols in this case are words that represent objects, or objects that are fictional representations of other objects. The 2-year-old’s playful pretending that a mud pie is the real thing is an example. Thinking in this stage becomes more sophisticated, less illogical, and less dependent on motor skills. Thinking in the preoperational stage is also noted for its egocentrism. Egocentrism in Piagetian theory is defined as the young child’s inability to see ideas or objects from another’s point of view. (Note: Egocentrism should not be mistaken for egotism, which refers to someone who is selfish or indif- ferent to the well-being of others.)

• The third stage, which occurs between the ages of 7 and 11, is the concrete opera- tional stage. It is at this stage that children can use their current knowledge base to analyze and connect their specific experiences to general ideas about the world. At this stage, children gain a better understanding of mental operations. They begin thinking logically about concrete events, although they have difficulty understanding abstract or hypothetical concepts. For example, if you ask children in this stage what they want to be when they grow up, they will likely select an occupation of someone they know personally or have seen in the media.

Section 3.3From Cognitivism to Constructivism: A Student-Centered Model

• The fourth and final stage is the formal operational stage, which occurs between the ages of 11 and 15. This is when an individual’s knowledge base and cognitive struc- tures are similar to those of an adult, and the ability to think abstractly emerges. For example, teachers can encourage students to think about possibilities by posing ethi- cal dilemmas that do not have concrete answers. To illustrate, the teacher poses this hypothetical question: “What would happen if the U.S. Supreme Court declared pub- lic education unconstitutional and closed down all public schools?” Piaget believed that it is only in the formal operational stage that knowledge is regularly extracted from experience and formal reasoning occurs.

The goal for teachers is to help students advance to the next cognitive stage by providing opportunities to think critically and problem solve. In the earlier stages, these opportunities need to incorporate concrete experiences and materials. The same may be true for older stu- dents when they encounter a new concept for the first time. Lecturing teens about the insides of a car’s engine will not be nearly as effective as letting them actually work on one.

Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934) Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist, while in agreement with many of Piaget’s ideas, did not subscribe to a stage theory of development. In addition, he was more concerned than Piaget was with the need for children to learn in cooperation with others. Much of his work focused on how language and social interaction are critical to cognitive development. A child’s cogni- tive abilities are enhanced through dialogue and activity with others, particularly with those who are more advanced in their understanding. According to Vygotsky, young children’s lan- guage skills can be developed through self-talk and imaginary play (Cole, John-Steiner, Scriber, Souberman, & Vygotsky, 1978). Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory of child development has influenced the development of cooperative learning techniques.

Vygotsky is perhaps best known for the concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Daniels & Clarkson, 2010). The zone of proximal development is an area, or range, between a child’s current level of ability and his or her potential level of ability. In this zone, a child is capable of learn- ing new material if it is presented by an adult or experienced peer. In other words, the zone of proximal develop- ment is a point when students are assigned tasks that are too difficult for them to complete alone, but which they can successfully complete with support from someone who is more knowledgeable on the subject (Louis, 2009). For example, a preschool-age child who can use scissors only when a teacher guides his hand movements as he cuts through a piece of paper is in the zone of proximal development. He cannot yet use scissors on his own; he needs his teacher to guide him.

Fuse/Thinkstock The work of Lev Vygotsky focused on the impor- tance of student collaboration with peers and teach- ers. In this model, the teacher is no longer the sole provider of information and learning.

Section 3.4Constructivism in the Classroom

As students become more capable of learning on their own, outside assistance is gradually decreased. A teacher’s goal would be to move a child into a higher zone, where new learn- ing is acquired. Vygotsky’s view of education included much group work in which advanced students could help others develop. Assigned math problems, for example, could be worked on in a group rather than individually, for the benefit of everyone; advanced students would solidify their learning and those at an introductory level would find their way into their ZPD.

Modern applications of Vygotsky’s theory speak of scaffolding, although Vygotsky did not use that precise term. Scaffolding is the process of providing assistance to students, by adults or more knowledgeable peers, within their ZPD. Take, for example, the group math work just mentioned. Rather than assigning a struggling student to work alone, or placing students in same-ability groups, the teacher would combine abilities into one group. The more advanced students would be available to help out. In addition, if the more advanced students had just recently moved to a higher level of understanding, they would now have opportunities to solidify their own earlier learning.

As the students gain a clearer understanding, or mastery of learning, the scaffolding is with- drawn. According to Vygotsky (1978), the teacher acts as a collaborator who participates with students in constructing the meaning of what is being learned by engaging in open-ended inquiry and interacting with students. This is in contrast to a teacher being the sole provider of information and providing only direct instruction to students (the so-called traditional method of teaching).

3.4 Constructivism in the Classroom Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s influence on constructivism can be observed in the theory’s agreed- upon basic tenets (Cooperstein & Kocevar-Weidinger, 2004; Ertmer & Newby, 2013; Hyslop- Margison & Strobel, 2008; Woolfolk, 2001):

• Learners actively construct their own knowledge. Learning is not a passive experi- ence. It is something that the learner does rather than something that is forced.

• Learners construct knowledge from their life experiences and other information, which affects how they take in new knowledge and understandings. In other words, past experiences and knowledge affect an individual’s present experience and how new knowledge is constructed.

• Learners build new knowledge based on prior knowledge. Learners must make connections between old knowledge and new information. In order to do so, old information must be challenged, scrutinized, accepted, or discarded in the learning process.

• Learners’ opportunities to build new knowledge are enhanced by interacting with others in social settings where there is the opportunity to share information and ideas.

• Learners make sense of the world by creating rules to explain their interactions and experiences.

• Each learner’s construction of knowledge is a unique, individual process. • Meaningful learning develops through authentic tasks in which the activities simu-

late the real world.

Section 3.4Constructivism in the Classroom

• Learning objectives are less often pre-designed by the teacher but more likely to emerge through the learning experience. In other words, teacher-constructed lesson plans are often not as important as those ideas for further learning that students arrive at themselves.

• The teacher’s role includes showing students how to construct their own knowl- edge, how to collaborate successfully, and how to arrive at positions and ideas they have chosen themselves.

A careful review of this list of tenets demonstrates their relationship to 21st-century learn- ing as discussed in Chapter 1. We might turn again to the Four Cs (collaboration, creativity, communication, critical thinking). In addition, the tenets address today’s need to be able to apply one’s knowledge to complex situations and to problem solve multifaceted issues. While to some extent these skills have forever been useful for people to have, the early 21st century is demonstrating that what students need to prepare for in their adult lives, and the ways in which they learn most easily, are more essential than in previous years and decades. To address both of these needs, a constructivist approach would appear to provide the most suc- cess. In recent years, virtually all educational reform initiatives have provided a constructivist approach (Ertmer & Newby, 2013).

Professional collaboration today includes working on teams, often at great geographic dis- tances. Implications for education include the need for problem-based learning, computer- supported collaborative learning, and authentic instruction—instruction based on real-life situations. The ability to access people and information technologically and at great distances means that teaching now includes helping students learn how to learn on their own more than at any time in the past.

It is also the case that students are more than ever arriving in their classrooms able to learn in constructivist ways. It is possible that children who have spent their lives surrounded by technology (“digital natives”) actually think differently than do their teachers who have come to technology somewhat later (“digital immigrants”). Technology, in other words, may have actually rewired children’s brains: “Although we do not yet have physical proof that the brains of digital natives are structurally different than those of digital immigrants, evidence is accu- mulating that signifies very real differences in their thinking patterns” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 59). The way this change manifests itself is in children’s preferences for learning both visually and socially. They prefer to learn by doing and, “if given a new tool to use, they are much more likely to get in and ‘muck around’ than refer to an owner’s manual” (p. 59). Doing, for this generation of students, appears to be even more important than knowing.

Building on Students’ Knowledge and Interests Out of constructivism have grown many classroom practices. Cognitive psychologist Jerome Bruner, as a notable example, devised the approach of discovery learning by basing his ideas on Piaget’s views. Bruner believed that new learning should be linked to familiar knowledge to make it more meaningful. In line with most constructivists, Bruner de-emphasized the teacher’s role and emphasized the student’s role. An example of discovery learning is as fol- lows: The teacher introduces a lesson or unit of study with specific examples that motivate students to recognize principles and relationships for themselves (Bruner, 1966). Although teachers provide initial examples, the students discover those relationships. Bruner (1966) emphasized the use of examples, concepts, and relationships to facilitate learning.

Section 3.4Constructivism in the Classroom

Experiential learning and hands-on learning activities are other examples of applications that base teaching and learning on constructivism. Experiential learning is based on the premise that learning is a complex mental activity, and to have meaning to the learner it must be created by that person. Advocates of experiential learning contend students should seek answers and draw conclusions for themselves if real learning is to occur. Service- learning projects are an example of such experiences. When students participate in making their community a better place, they also learn more about themselves as learners and as future adult citizens.

There are many other examples, all of which use constructivist techniques in different ways. In the constructivist classroom, the instructor is more of a facilitator than a teacher in the tra- ditional sense. For example, rather than simply telling the students what they should know, teachers help students access prior knowledge. One way is to use cues, which are hints that focus students’ attention on what is to be learned. For instance, a teacher uses a cue when he or she explains to students that the activity they are about to engage in will help them see the similarities and differences among the rocks they have been studying in science. In short, the teacher has told students what the topic is, which helps them to activate their prior knowl- edge, while also setting up the expectations for the lesson.

Providing Autonomy for Students The teacher also helps students take charge of their own learning. Instead of following a set curriculum, the teacher is guided by a more flexible curriculum. This does not mean giving up control of the classroom, nor does it mean a diminished role for the teacher. On the contrary, the teacher’s role in classes that foster autonomy is even more important than in a traditional classroom, but the role shifts from the knowledge leader in charge to more of a facilitator of knowledge. In the autonomous classroom, the teacher works closely with students to help them set goals, assess their knowledge, and determine what should be learned next. It should be pointed out that behaviorist approaches are not entirely avoided in this type of classroom, as the teacher also provides direct instruction when it is needed.

Engaging Students in Authentic Learning Finally, constructivist classrooms aim for authentic learning, which builds on the concept of learning by doing by engaging students in real-life scenarios (Barron & Darling-Hammond, 2008). In the course of a project or problem, students engage in the type of multidisci- plinary problem solving and critical thinking that professionals use every day. Students learn how to investigate problems that require more than a textbook answer or a formula to solve things. They are engaged in the work firsthand. Take, for example, kindergarteners learning about how plants grow. Do you think they would have the same level of learning if they were only told or read a book about how plants grow, or simply watched a video about plants? While those are useful ways to learn or share information, they would not have the same impact as students experiencing the process for themselves. Indeed, the most effec- tive learning experience for kindergarten children is to actually plant seeds and observe them grow.

Section 3.4Constructivism in the Classroom

Authentic learning is defined by four components (Rule, 2006). The first component is that students are engaged in real-world problems that provide opportunities for learners to imitate the work of professionals. The second is that students are involved in inquiries and activities that practice deep thinking skills and metacogni- tion: thinking about thinking or moni- toring of thinking (Martinez, 2006; Schneider, 2008). The third is that stu- dents need to be actively engaged in learning and communicate as part of a community of learners. Finally, authen- tic learning requires that students have choices to help direct their own learning. Simply put, the heart of the concept of authentic learning is the idea that students are given opportunities to develop solutions to problems or to find the answer on their own and with the support of their teacher and peers by engaging in real-life situations (Gatlin & Edwards, 2007; Maina, 2004).

So what does this look like in the classroom? From a constructivist perspective, learning usually begins with a question, a case, or a problem. In the plant example, a teacher asked the kindergartners about how plants grow and then engaged them in finding the answer through hands-on activities. Planting the seeds and monitoring their growth is an example of an authentic learning experience and is exactly what professional botanists do. Construc- tivism suggests that as students work on a problem, the teacher serves as a guide by helping students steer their course of learning. While it is obvious that not every activity in class can be a project, there is a multitude of ways to make learning more authentic and the expe- riences real. (See Case in Point: Constructivism in Action for more examples.)

Constructivism challenges teachers to break away from the traditional tenets of teaching in which the teacher is the deliverer of knowledge, empowering students to be seekers of knowledge. It also challenges teachers to find ways to connect with students’ natural curios- ity and engage with them to learn in new ways. This is easier said than done, especially when students are living in a world where their interests are often captured by the immediacy of video games and social media. In addition, teachers must also face the fact of teacher evalua- tions based on children’s test scores. While it can take some courage to commit to constructiv- ist learning, teachers who do so find that their students’ test scores match those of students from more traditional, behaviorist classrooms.

Tom-N/iStock/Thinkstock Constructivism focuses on learning by doing, involving students in real-world activities and scenarios.

Section 3.4Constructivism in the Classroom

Case in Point: Constructivism in Action Here are two real-life examples of a constructivist classroom in action:

• A first-grade teacher introduces a math problem by asking the class to measure the length of the classroom. Although the eventual goal is to introduce a standard ruler, the teacher asks the students to reflect and construct their own methods of measurement. Jackson reaches inside his desk for a pencil and suggests they could use that. “That will take too long, I think,” responds Trudi. She looks around the classroom for a bit and decides that the broom in the housekeeping corner might do. Soon, other children are finding alternatives and eventually decide to try them all. Although the required curricu- lum includes learning to measure with a ruler, the teacher’s flexible approach focuses on making sure that children first understand the concept of measurement. Rulers will be introduced in a day or two.

• At the high school level, students often study literature by William Shakespeare, Emily or Charlotte Brontë, and other classic writers. These works are often difficult to teach because at first glance they may not seem relatable to today’s students. However, a constructivist teacher can artfully help students uncover the universal themes that can be transferred across generations. Thus, instead of assigned readings and lectures, a constructivist teacher might ask students to form groups and take a section of the text or act of a play and translate that section into a more modern version. The groups then perform their skits for their class. Discussion follows each section, and the teacher keys in on what the students are most interested in. This activity allows students to process the text on multiple levels, leading to better understanding and maintained interest.

For an interactive version of this case study, visit your e-book.

Evaluating Constructivism If we want to prepare our students for the 21st century and ensure that they have the neces- sary skills to be successful, then learners need be given more opportunities to take ownership of their learning. By following a constructivist philosophy, teachers can create more engaging opportunities for learning by developing lessons based on student interests and accessing their prior knowledge. Additionally, creating authentic learning experiences in which stu- dents have the opportunity to engage in experiences that simulate real life and encourage collaboration can help foster deep learning and high engagement. Crafting a learning envi- ronment where students have greater autonomy over their learning can also help develop independent thinkers and learners.

In spite of their appeal to educators, constructivist practices have apparent limitations. Many new teachers, especially, are reluctant to try experiential learning, which requires turn- ing much leadership over to the students. They may be more comfortable with the familiar approach of telling students what they need to know. Furthermore, not all subjects or skills are amenable to discovery learning. Some material may be far too complex or too new to learn without the direct assistance of a teacher or adult. Also, given the many pressures that teach- ers face to ensure coverage of the required curriculum as well as the need to prepare for vari- ous standardized tests, there may not be sufficient time for students to discover relationships for themselves. Problem-solving activities take time (and patience) to implement.

Section 3.5Comparing Theories in Practice

3.5 Comparing Theories in Practice From the theoretical views of behaviorism emerges a view of teaching that might be termed traditional. In this approach, sometimes nicknamed “The Sage on the Stage,” the knowl- edgeable teacher stands and delivers new information to the students, who, in turn, learn what they are supposed to know in order to pass an upcoming test. Constructivism can be contrasted with this traditional way of learning (see Table 3.2 and Case in Point: Two Teachers, Two Styles). Rote memorization is often a key part of the work students under- take in traditional classrooms, and students are considered passive learners as they wait for the teacher to direct their learning. Both views of teaching and learning incorporate what has been learned in the past to inform what should be incorporated in the upcoming curriculum.

They differ, however, in the way the past is used. In the traditional classroom, the teacher determines that a learning goal has been met and then moves on to the next level. If the goal has not been met, the teacher may well break the information down into smaller, more manageable bits of learning, and then re-teach as needed. In constructivism, it is under- stood that students’ previous experiences shape and bring meaning to their learning and should be utilized in lessons. Students are not expected to be passive participants in their learning. Rather, they are expected to be actively engaged and take ownership of pieces of their learning.

Table 3.2: Traditional classroom versus constructivist classroom

Traditional classroom Constructivist classroom

Curriculum begins with the parts of the whole and emphasizes basic skills.

Curriculum emphasizes big concepts, beginning with the whole and expanding to include the parts.

Strict adherence to fixed curriculum is highly valued.

Pursuit of student questions and interests is valued.

Materials are primarily textbooks and workbooks. Materials include primary sources of material and manipulative materials.

Learning is based on repetition. Learning is interactive, building on what the student already knows.

Teachers disseminate information to students; students are recipients of knowledge.

Teachers have a dialogue with students, helping students construct their own knowledge.

Teacher’s role is directive, rooted in authority. Teacher’s role is interactive, rooted in negotiation.

Assessment is through testing; correct answers are the product that indicates success.

Assessment includes student works, observations, and points of view, as well as tests. Process is as important as product.

Knowledge is seen as inert, defined by the teacher or the fixed curriculum.

Knowledge is seen as dynamic, always changing with our experiences.

Students work primarily alone. Students work primarily in groups.

Source: From Workshop: Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning, Concept to Classroom, 13th ed. online, accessed on April 2, 2013, at http://teachinglearningresources.pbworks.com/w/page/19919544/Con?

Section 3.5Comparing Theories in Practice

As we think about teaching and learning in the 21st century, these contrasts are important for several reasons. First, for learning to be meaningful, students need to take ownership of it and not be passive learners. Second, teachers need to see their role as facilitators rather than as sages on the stage. Teachers need to focus on helping students become independent learners and releasing part of the responsibility for teaching and learning to them.

The following feature, Case in Point: Two Teachers, Two Styles, illustrates the differences in the more traditional way of teaching versus a more constructivist way of teaching.

Case in Point: Two Teachers, Two Styles Mr. Heshey begins the lesson by having students turn to page 136 of their textbook. They are continuing their unit on American history. He has the students take turns reading a paragraph aloud. As they read the chapter, he points out new vocabulary words and instructs the class to highlight them. At the end of the chapter, the students are to add each new term to the list in their binder, as well as its definition.

Toward the end of the period, he asks several questions of the class so that he can check for their understanding of the reading section. For instance, he asks Jim what year the American Revolution took place. Chynna is asked in which country the Americans and their allies fought. Jarrell is asked to explain the Boston Tea Party. Mr. Heshey then gives the class a brief compre- hension quiz.

Mrs. Lopez begins her lesson on American history by asking her students to write down what they know about wars fought by Americans. Students then have a chance to share their think- ing and respond to others in the class. Mrs. Lopez also shares a personal story about her hus- band being a Marine and what it has been like to have him away from home for the past year. She asks the class to spend the next 10 minutes perusing the chapter on American history. When the timer goes off, she asks students to share their thinking on what they learned. After her students share their thoughts, she assigns groups to work together for the remainder of the period. Each group is given a section of the chapter to read and is asked to present a sum- mary of the section and what they learned in the passage.

Note that in this scenario, Mrs. Lopez engaged her students by asking them to write what they knew about Americans and war. A lot of information was gained by allowing students to think about the topic and to personally connect with the material. The conversation that ensued in class after they brainstormed ideas was likely more engaging and provocative because of this personal connection. The goal in asking students to think about what they already know is to prepare them for the learning ahead and to help them make connections with their real lives (Marzano, 2004). By activating students’ prior knowledge and schema, you are preparing them to learn.

Questions to Consider

1. Create a comprehensive list of similarities and differences between each teacher’s approach. Use Table 3.2 as a guide. What are the advantages or disadvantages of each?

2. Which class do you think best fits your learning style? Teaching style? Why?

Section 3.6Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles

3.6 Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles Ask a group of students how they learn best, and they will provide a range of answers. Some students learn best when they listen and hear information, while others prefer to see and watch things, and still others would rather use their hands to make something and explore it in a concrete way. The point is, everyone learns and retains information in different ways. As a teacher, understanding the different forms of intelligences will help with lesson planning, development of learning objectives and activities, and, most importantly, meeting the unique needs of students.

Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences provides a distinct way in which to understand the domains of intelligences. Gardner, a psychologist and professor of neuroscience at Harvard University, focuses on understanding the ways in which people interact with the world. His theory demonstrates that intelligences are distinct from one another and that people have different types of intelligences, which they often exhibit in very different ways.

In 1983, Gardner formulated a list of seven distinct intelligences (1983, 1999), which included linguistic intelligence, logical/mathematical intelligence, musical rhythmic intelligence, bodily/kinesthetic intelligence, spatial intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and intrapersonal intelligence. In 1999, he added an eighth component called naturalist intelligence (Gardner, 1999), and in 2000, he acknowledged that there may be such a thing as an existential intelligence (in lieu of a spiritual or religious intelligence). Each of these intel- ligences was identified by the research as distinct and emerging from different parts of the brain.

Each kind of intelligence focuses on a different ability that individuals possess. Gardner’s theory suggests that individuals learn in unique ways. For example, a student who readily masters reading is not necessar- ily more intelligent than a child who moves at a slower pace or who struggles with learning the same skills. Rather, the slower reader may simply learn in a different way or excel in other intelligences. It may even be that the reader is slower because she is working to understand the concept at a deeper level.

Gardner points out that each intelligence is present in every individual, albeit at different levels. Table 3.3 outlines each type of intelligence.

Associated Press The concept of multiple intelligenc- es, developed by Howard Gardner, has been enormously important in helping educators understand that students learn in different ways, which has led to the creation of more effective, customized curri- cula and teaching practices.

Section 3.6Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles

Table 3.3: Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences

Intelligence type Definition

Linguistic The ability to use language to express one’s thinking, to convey messages, and to express oneself rhetorically and poetically. Focus is on “language at the fore” and on well-developed verbal skills. Gardner sees writers, poets, lawyers, and speak- ers among those having high linguistic intelligence.

Logical/mathematical The ability to group together concepts and things abstractly; to recognize, determine, and carry out numerical patterns and mathematical operations; and to investigate issues from a scientific perspective. Gardner sees this intelligence most often associated with scientific and mathematical thinking.

Musical rhythmic The ability to hear patterns and pitch, to produce and appreciate rhythm, and to think in a musical sense. People who have strong musical intelligence can remember music easily, and it stays in their minds all the time.

Bodily/kinesthetic The ability to control and use the body or its parts, such as hands or fingers, to solve problems, make something, or put on some kind of production. Examples include people in athletics or the performing arts.

Spatial The ability to visualize the world in one’s mind and to visualize patterns of space both accurately and abstractly. The most evident examples of people who have strong spatial intelligence are pilots, sailors, architects, artists, and sculptors.

Intrapersonal The ability to be self-aware, know who one is and how one reacts to things, and stay in tune with inner thoughts and feelings. Gardner believes that people with this intelligence have a strong understanding of themselves and know their limits.

Interpersonal The ability to understand other people and be able to respond to the needs and moods of others. This is most evident in educators, salespeople, counselors, psychologists, politicians, religious leaders, and counselors.

Naturalist The ability to recognize, categorize, and discriminate among plants, rocks, ani- mals, and other things in nature. This intelligence was very important to early humans, including hunters, explorers, and settlers, and continues to be impor- tant to farmers, geologists, and botanists.

Sources: Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books; Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner’s theory challenged the tradition of viewing intelligence solely through the lens of an IQ test, yielding a single score. He was concerned with the tremendous significance attached to one score received on a single IQ test taken in an hour, especially because it is administered with paper and pencil rather than in an exchange between the examiner and the test taker (Gardner, 1983; 2011). Gardner believed the traditional ways of testing intelligence did not accurately assess a person’s intelligence in a range of fields. He felt that many of the ways in which an individual showcased intelligence—such as navigating the stars, mastering a for- eign language, or composing using a computer—could not be discerned readily in a standard- ized test (Gardner, 1983). Rather, such tests have historically focused on only the first two intelligences listed in Table 3.3.

Section 3.6Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles

Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles in the Classroom In the classroom, students can often answer the same questions, and they may have similar knowledge, but the patterns and connections between their intelligences stop there. They may learn information in very different ways. In his theory, Gardner lists three discrete meanings of the term intelligence. He posits that people are unique, that there are varied ways people can exhibit intelligence, and that they often have greater strengths in certain domains of intelligences (Gardner, 1983).

Gardner’s work has significantly affected many fields and, in particular, has had a pro- found impact on the thinking and practice in education. The theory of multiple intelli- gences has changed the way many individuals view the concept of intelligence and how learning in the classroom could be approached. It provides a conceptual framework that helps teachers to organize and reflect on curriculum assessment and teaching practices, allowing them to develop new approaches that meet the needs of their diverse learners (Kornhaber, 2001).

A second implication for teaching is the manner in which material is presented in the class- room. Because Gardner’s theory illuminates the various ways in which students learn, instruction should not address only one intelligence. However, developing side by side with Gardner’s theory was the related concept of learning styles. We may speak of someone who is a visual learner, who processes information best through reading a book, watching a movie, or engaging with some other types of visual media. Others can be thought of as auditory learners, who learn best by listening, or kinesthetic learners, who learn best while in motion. While Gardner’s research has focused on a psychological theory of human learning and devel- opment, learning styles can be defined as each person’s preference for ways of taking in and processing information (Litzinger, Lee, Wise, & Felder, 2007), and they help us to consider the range of individual differences in learning (Price, 2004).

Numerous theorists have posited their definitions of learning styles and related applications to the classroom. It has been said that there are “almost as many definitions as there are theorists in the area,” making it difficult for classroom teachers to apply the concept (Cassidy, 2004, p. 440). One way that can be practical is to relate learning styles to their most closely defined intelligence. For example, a social learner is someone who is strong in the arena of interpersonal intelligence, while a solitary learner is strong in intrapersonal intelligence. In addition, a visual learner is strong in spatial intelligence, an aural learner in musical, a verbal learner in linguistic, a physical learner in kinesthetic, and a logical learner in mathematical intelligence.

Understanding the favored learning style of a student and tending to it by providing instruc- tion that targets that style can lead to increased student achievement (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork, 2009; Prashnig, 2005), although over years of research, this has not been entirely proven (Cassidy, 2004). It would be misguided to insist that a teacher tailor all lessons exclusively to one style of learning (Felder & Brent, 2005; Forsten, Grant, & Hol- las, 2002; McBride, 2004; McCoy & Ketterlin-Geller, 2004; Tomlinson, 2002). First of all, no teacher has a class of students who all share a dominant intelligence type or learning style. Secondly, creating adaptive learners who can learn through a variety of strategies and

Section 3.6Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles

settings is a major goal of 21st-century education. Instruction that addresses a broad array of learning styles has consistently been shown to be more effective than traditional instruc- tion (Felder & Brent, 2005) and is much more realistic in the 21st-century world. After all, in the workplace rarely will an employer say to a newly hired employee, “Welcome! Don’t worry; we will only ask you to perform work in your preferred style of learning.” Never- theless, a teacher’s focus will be on teaching to students’ strengths to guarantee the most learning possible. This is especially important early on, as teachers want to encourage stu- dents’ thirst for knowledge.

There are a few points to remember to avoid the misuses of learning styles that frequently occur in classrooms (Felder & Spurlin, 2005). First, a student’s preference for one style of learning may fall on a continuum from mild to strong. Preference for a certain style may only be slightly more than preference for another style. Next, simply understanding stu- dents’ preferred styles of learning does not mean that their success in learning specific content can be predicted simply by teaching to these preferred learning strategies. There are, in fact, any number of other factors that affect student learning, from gender differ- ences to cognitive abilities to what a child ate for breakfast that morning. Third, students’ preference for one style can change if a teacher introduces a new style and the students’ comfort level rises through repeated experiences. Teachers should therefore be flexible in their use of learning styles.

Evaluating Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles In spite of the attention that multiple intelligences and learning styles have garnered over the years, there are also critics of each. Some critics believe there is insufficient empirical evi- dence to support their use. In regard to Gardner’s theory, some critics believe that IQ tests are adequate, empirically sound, and a more accurate depiction of a person’s natural intelligence (Gottfredson, 2004; Kaufman, 2009; Waterhouse, 2006). Learning styles, on the other hand, are often criticized for lacking a strong theoretical basis. Studies of their efficacy are criticized for their lack of reliability or validity. Further, research findings provide few data that connect learning styles with learning improvement (Spence, 2011).

In spite of the criticisms, both views of human learning and intelligence have been adopted by schools and teachers across the country. They give instructors a manageable way to ascertain each student’s strongest intelligences and best learning styles and, from there, to plan appro- priate lessons and activities.

Table 3.4 provides an overview of the roles of learners and teachers for each of the theories this chapter has described.

Section 3.6Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles

Table 3.4: Comparing the theories

Behaviorism Cognitivism Constructivism Multiple intelligences

View of learners Evidence of learning comes from observable behavior

Internal pro- cesses include problem solving and concept for- mation as more important than behavior

Student con- structs own knowledge, builds new knowledge based on prior knowledge

Student possesses eight or more intelligences to varying degrees

Teacher’s role Deliver knowl- edge; modify behavior

Make learning meaningful; help students organize and relate new information to knowledge in memory

Provide authen- tic experiences within student’s zone of proximal development

Provide learning experiences with attention to mul- tiple intelligences

Student’s role Respond to stimuli

Actively partici- pate in learning process

Collaborate with others or work on own to learn and to scaffold other learners

Use favored intel- ligences much of the time but expand to others as encouraged

Uses made of technology

Computer assisted technol- ogy (CAI), drill software

N/A Collaboration online with a geographically broad community of learners

N/A

Building Your Portfolio How you think students learn will influence your teaching philosophy. This textbook takes the position that student-centered, constructivist learning is most advantageous for 21st-century students. Yet, more traditional approaches have their strengths as well, not the least of which is the fact that they are generally easier for neophyte teachers to use. Take some time to think about what you like and dislike about each approach. Also consider which theory you think would facilitate student learning the most.

Summary & Resources

Summary & Resources

Chapter Summary Theories about the ways students learn have evolved over time and come from diverging— often widely diverging—views of development. Behaviorists see children as beings who respond to stimuli in the environment and, in this way, experience learning. This indicates that teachers are to be clear and direct while sharing expectations and goals. Education is very teacher centered.

Cognitivists, while sharing the behaviorist view that learning is something that happens to children, emphasize the importance of making learning meaningful. They see children as active participants in the education process. Proponents of constructivism, a sub-theory of cognitivism, agree that students are active participants, but they argue that learning comes from within children and that they construct their own knowledge.

The continuum from behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism, as a way to explicate cog- nitive development, parallels a continuum of teaching that moves from being teacher directed to being child directed. It is widely thought that the student-directed approach of constructiv- ism works most successfully to foster 21st-century skills.

The theories of multiple intelligences and learning styles provide flexible approaches to education in which individual children’s needs and interests are catered to. They, like the other theories discussed in this chapter, have their detractors as well as their supporters. At the same time, they offer much that is useful for the classroom teacher making educational decisions.

Questions for Further Critical Thinking & Reflection

1. What would be the unique benefits of viewing teaching as an art? What would be the unique benefits of viewing teaching as a science? If you had to choose between the art of teaching or the science of teaching, which would you choose as more compat- ible with your views about education? Why?

2. Compare and contrast the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky. How much do they line up? How much do they differ? Are there any similarities or differences between the two theories? Is there value to using both theories in the classroom? Why or why not?

3. Depending on the age of your students or future students, write a short paragraph about where they would fall according to Piaget’s stages. Do these particular stages require you as a teacher to do anything extra or special when teaching a lesson?

4. Consider your answers to the first three questions. Why do you think you answered as you did? Can you explain your preferences? Next, answer question 5 and consider if that might provide one explanation.

5. Take a moment to reflect on your school experiences. To what extent do you think your time in school reflected a traditional way of teaching and learning or a con- structivist way?

6. In regard to instruction, what do you see as the predominant focus of teachers today? Do you see them taking a more constructivist approach or a more traditional approach? Please explain your answer and list three specific examples that you have seen from your own time in the classroom.

Summary & Resources

Web Resources Constructivist educators use organizers to set up their thinking, use and import pictures to make connections, or spur their thinking by creating hierarchical representations of informa- tion. You can see examples of these at the following websites:

• Education Place.  www.eduplace.com/graphicorganizer

• Getting Started on Differentiated Instruction.  http://www.diffcentral.com/Video_Clips.html

• Differentiated Instruction and Formative Assessment.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFXbuE-21I4

• Free Technology for Teachers.   http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2012/11/three-dozen-graphic-organizers-

for.html#.UVsYdFcy6Rk • Student Handouts.

 http://www.studenthandouts.com/graphicorganizers.htm • Teachnology.

 http://www.teach-nology.com/worksheets/graphic • EduNova.

 http://www.edu-nova.com/graphic-organizers-for-students-and-educators.html • VARK: A Guide to Learning Styles.

 http://www.vark-learn.com • IU News Room: “Helicopter Parents.”

 http://newsinfo.iu.edu/web/page/normal/6073.html

The following video links provide firsthand perspectives on the concepts presented in this chapter:

• Edutopia’s Interview with Howard Gardner.  http://www.edutopia.org/multiple-intelligences-howard-gardner-video

• Overview of Graphic Organizers.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp0DXZ2aAVk

• Using Technology in the ELL Classroom.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbfUp76Rz5g

• Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjTxQy_U3ac

Additional Resources If you would like to know more about the origins of the theories discussed in this chapter, the following suggestions will provide much information and food for thought. Although most are from earlier times, they can be found in libraries and some bookstores.

Gardner, H. (2011). Truth, beauty, and goodness reframed: Educating for the virtues in the age of truthiness and Twitter. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Summary & Resources

Piaget, J. (1928). Judgment and reasoning in the child. New York: Routledge.

Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Vygotsky, L. (1986/1934). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Key Terms accommodation In Piaget’s theory, the step to understanding that requires incorporat- ing a new schema into one’s thinking.

assimilation In Piaget’s theory, the step to understanding that includes placing new information into existing schemas.

behaviorism A theory, often associated with B. F. Skinner, that views the environ- ment as most influential on development and behavior.

cognitivism A theory that focuses on the internal processes and mental dimensions of learning.

constructivism A theory, most associated with Piaget and Vygotsky, that views knowl- edge as being constructed by the child.

disequilibrium In Piaget’s theory, a cogni- tive imbalance that takes place when new information has not yet been assimilated or accommodated.

learning style A person’s preference for ways of taking in and processing information.

learning theory An attempt to system- atically organize complicated human phe- nomena in an effort to better understand, explain, and predict behavior.

metacognition The process of thinking about thinking.

negative reinforcement The psychological technique of rewarding appropriate behav- ior by removing an unpleasant consequence.

positive reinforcement The psychological technique of rewarding appropriate behav- ior by applying a positive consequence.

punishment A penalty imposed for inap- propriate behavior.

scaffolding Assistance from more knowl- edgeable others that makes learning more easily attained.

schema A mental outline, concept, or model.

shaping Guiding behavior to approximate the desired behavioral goal.

theory of multiple intelligences The theory associated with Howard Gardner that argues for eight or more individual intelli- gences possessed by each human.

zone of proximal development (ZPD) The area of development between a person’s present level of skills that encompasses tasks that can be done with scaffolding from others.