Assignment 1: Synthesizing to Equilibrate – From Knowledge to Constructivism in Teaching and Learning

The fundamental point of discussing the value of knowledge, and the value of knowledge as getting to the truth, is to achieve our goals in the pursuit of an authentic life (Pritchard, 2018). We want to get things right and create meaningful lives. How we construct that meaning, and what constitutes real knowledge, are sites of tension that beg questions about both epistemology and pedagogy.

One such site of tension is around what constitutes knowledge. There are no easily available criteria for evaluating when we have knowledge, or don’t. In justifying our true beliefs (truth taken here on the face of it), we end up with either unsupported beliefs, an infinite regress of justification (turtles!), or circular chains of justification. If circular, any new belief would depend on our own collection of prior understandings, forming our worldview (Pritchard, 2018). Our collection of priors is gained from a variety of sources such as perception, testimony, memory, and experience. Perception is particularly powerful given that everyone gathers information of the world through our senses even if by doing so we are experiencing the world a step apart. One argument that attempts to mediate this problem agrees with that fact that what we perceive is not the world itself but our perception of it. However, for there to be a world to perceive, we need to accept that there is an external world that we are experiencing and that it must be mind-independent even if our perceptions are not (Pritchard, 2018).

 If we each view the world through our own perceptions, we cannot know that anyone else perceives, experiences, or knows the same way as our own selves (Pritchard, 2018). We can only guess about what another person is experiencing and potentially be incorrect while understanding that sometimes we might also get it right. Objective truth then, might mean that no matter our beliefs we could still be wrong about what we know about the world (Pritchard, 2018). Another way to view this is that validity in our perceptions and experiences is not the same as in an absolute truth or truth in a scientific sense (von Glasersfeld, 2005). Piaget expressed that our perceptual knowledge is developed dynamically through a process of equilibration and via interaction between new concepts and those that we have previously constructed in our collection (von Glasersfeld, 2005). Equilibration is not a linear process and involves reconciling conceptual contradictions by acting on our environment with our own perceptions or ideas, then reflecting and integrating the new experience, thereby changing our environment (Fosnot & Perry, 2005). Equilibration occurs individually, but our prior collection of knowledge may well be constructed culturally. The truth about the world then, is a product of many unknowable minds whose environmentally negotiated concepts construct the world (Fosnot & Perry, 2005).

Constructivism as a pedagogy, approaches learning from the perspective that we make our own meaning. This doesn’t mean that there is no accepted truth, just that the truth is embedded in a context (Taber, 2020). Learners belong to a community as they learn and may belong to specific communities of practice later on. Meaning therefore, might be unique to the individual but that doesn’t mean they are apart from a community of inquiry (Corlett, 2007; Fosnot & Perry, 2005). The symbols, language, and pedagogy that enables learning is negotiated between all of the individuals within a community of practice as new learners (members) progress toward culturally accepted ideas in a way that leaves the culture open to disequilibration and innovation. Approaches to teaching and learning might therefore be best served by selecting epistemic theories and educational pedagogy that suit the context of learning and that fully acknowledge the fact that an epistemic position was chosen intentionally (Cobb, 2005).

In designing courses with faculty, the concepts described here will help me to articulate and justify key strategies for teaching and learning situated within the faculty’s discipline. Activities and assessments will align with the cultural norms of the discipline with opportunities for discourse and reflection.

References

Cobb, P. (2005). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist

perspectives. In Fosnot, C.T. (Ed), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 39-58).

Teachers College Press.

Corlett, J. A. (2007). Analyzing social knowledge. Social Epistemology, 21(3), 231-247.

Fosnot, C. T. & Perry, R.S. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In Fosnot, C.T. (Ed),

Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (8-38). Teachers College Press.

Pritchard, D. (2018). What is this thing called knowledge? (4th ed.). Routledge.

Taber, K. (2020). Constructivism – the good; the bad; and the abhorrent? [Video]. UBC.

Von Glasersfeld, E. (2005). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In Fosnot, C.T. (Ed), Constructivism:

Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 3-7). Teachers College Press.