A Lesson in Constructivism and House Hunting

Constructivism is a solid way to support and create learning opportunities that lead to a growth in student’s knowledge. This constructivist lesson is one in a series designed for Planning 10 students completing the Finance Unit. Together, all the lessons are meant to teach financial literacy and the end result will have the students create a monthly budget for their future selves (10 years after high school). Financial literacy can be tricky and yet is an extremely important topic for students. It can be a challenge for them to meet all the criteria for knowledge when it comes to finances. In order for this information to become knowledge, it has to be true, the person has to believe it, and they must be able to justify it (Pritchard, 2014). This lesson is designed to help meet all of those criteria.

The finance unit follows the Careers/Education Unit, therefore the students have had time to think about their future. The plan is designed for classrooms with face to face instruction (although can be modified for an online or blended environment), with one to one devices and the internet.  After some preparatory finance and lifestyle activities and students choosing a job (and a salary) this plan, will start with a flipped lesson that the students are to review at home; they will learn about options for living arrangements (renting vs. buying), and the process behind searching for a home. Once in class, their task will be to choose the option that fits best with their hypothetical salary and lifestyle and then chose a real home, as well as research the additional costs (cable, hydro, insurance etc.) Finally, they will need to justify their choices and show how they have stayed within budget while balancing their needs and wants.

Following the constructivist approach, the lesson involves real-world environments that expose students to the content in a way that is both relevant and authentic (Jonassen, 1991 and 1994). Choosing a place to live while using a realistic budget, is a way to place students in a rich problem-solving situation (Wilson & Cole, 1991). Their task represents the natural complexity of the world as there are multiple “right” answers and ways to approach the problem. It provides an appreciation for multiple perspectives (Honebein, 1996) as students with similar incomes may make different choices. This also helps to provide for learner control (Wilson & Cole, 1991) as they have choice of job, living arrangements, type of home, cable package and so on. Additionally, students can chose to represent their data in whatever way works best for them. The role of the instructor is to help provide and analyze strategies that the students can use to help them complete the task (for example, providing them with guidelines for how much to spend). Then the structure of the lesson allows the teacher to act as a coach, helping to guide the students through their home search and justification.

The recent unprecedented access to information fits in well with constructivist theory, where the learners are able to actively create their own knowledge. There is no need for a passive lecture anymore. For this lesson, the information that may have been previously presented in this way is provided in a flipped style, as “pre-homework”. This saves time and frees the instructor up to support the active learning in class (Gerstein, 2011). Students will review the mini lesson “A Roof Over my Head” at home before the lesson. Regardless of where knowledge comes from, whether it is from the instructor or from online sources, it is key that learners are critical of knowledge sources. Since we want knowledge to be both true and justifiable (Pritchard, 2014) educators must be aware of the information that the learners are gaining. It is essential to help learners become critical thinkers, who can assess all the information available to them and be able to evaluate it so that they can turn it into knowledge. This lesson provides students with different sources, some verified by the teacher, others, students need to use their own judgement and to check accuracy.

New knowledge is added when students are actively involved in a process of meaning construction (as opposed to passively receiving information.) People are the makers of meaning and knowledge. The learner’s previous knowledge constructions, beliefs and attitudes are considered in the knowledge construction process. This lesson uses the student’s existing knowledge of their own living situation and the knowledge they gained in the previous unit on future jobs and education. Since all students will come from different home environments it is important that the instructor show sensitivity toward and attentiveness to the learner’s previous constructions. Some students will have only experienced either renting or buying and may be unfamiliar with the other option.

Exploration or discovery is a favoured approach, used to encouraged students to seek knowledge independently and to pursuit their goals. In an attempt to create a lesson that would qualify as enhanced discovery (as opposed to unassisted discovery) which was shown to lead to greater learning, specifically in teens (Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich & Tennenbaum, 2001) the lesson uses methods like providing feedback throughout the lesson and showing and analyzing examples. It also requires students to explain their own ideas and choices. While this lesson is active learning, the task is still guided, which can liberate the learner from the heavy load of pure discovery learning which requires a greater number of mental operations (Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich & Tennenbaum, 2001).

In order to enhance the knowledge construction process, students are required to explain and justify their choices. This type evaluation should serves as a self-analysis tool (Jonassen, 1991) and will foster a reflective practice (Jonassen, 1994). Since the instructor is supporting the students, mistakes and questions that arise can generate feedback and support understanding (Wilson & Cole, 1991). The instructor is also encouraged to use past and present examples of student work, this type of diagnostic teaching, can attempt to remedy errors. The final product created from this lesson uses of multiple modes of representation (Honebein, 1996), as students have a choice in how they will show their learning. Constructivist teaching strategy, involves feedback which allows students apply their knowledge and reflect (Bavskar, S. N et., 2009). Feedback is strongly encouraged as it can increase effort, motivation, commitment, and reduces discrepancies. The instructor in this lesson should attempt to use Hattie & Timperley’s (2007) three major feedback questions: Where am I going? How am I going? and Where to next?

Learning differences can be best understood and attended to in relation to constructivist theory of knowledge. This shift the focus of assessment and remediation away from specific skill development that attends to standard answers and problem solving to an examination of the adaptive, transforming thinking used to solve problems (Grobecker, 1996). The construction of knowledge is learner centered – the role of the teacher is decentralized allowing students opportunities to define their understanding and encouraging the construction of knowledge, creating a more holistic approach (Fosnot, 2013). This creates an environment where students are successful regardless of their academic ability. Some students may need more support with the assignment, as they would with their housing in real life. In this guided discovery model, students are taught how to discover and how to structure the new information (Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich & Tennenbaum, 2001), additionally students are supported through scaffolding, a process of guiding leaners from what they know to what they will know (Vygotsky, 1978). The structure of the lesson allows instructors the freedom to provide scaffolding, allowing the students to perform tasks that are slightly beyond their ability.

This constructivist lesson creates learning opportunities and builds knowledge for all learners including those with diverse needs. Its design will help meet the criteria for new knowledge. The real world relevance and application, along with the opportunity for students to support their learning means that students will be able to construct their own financial knowledge.

 

References:

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P.J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1).

Baviskar, S. N., Hartle, R. T., & Whitney, T. (2009). Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: Derived from a review of the literature and applied to five   constructivist teaching method articles. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 541-550.

Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, *2nd Ed. Teachers  College Press

Gerstein, Jackie (2011) The Flipped Classroom Model: A Full Picture. User Generated Education. Retrieved from: https://usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/the-flipped-classroom-model-a-full-picture/

Ginsberg, S. M., & Schulte, K. (2008). Instructional Accommodations: Impact of Conventional vs. Social Constructivist View of Disability. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 84-91.

Grobecker, B. (1996). Reconstructing the paradigm of learning disabilities: A holistic/constructivist interpretation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19(3), 179-200.

Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

Honebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design, 11-24.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?. Educational technology research and development, 39(3), 5-14.

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking Technology: Toward a Constructivist Design Model. Educational technology, 34(4), 34-37.

Pritchard, D. (2014). What is this thing called knowledge? *3rd Edition; Routledge.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process.

Wilson, B., & Cole, P. (1991). A review of cognitive teaching models. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(4), 47-64.