Arciero 1

Name: Ryan Arciero

Date: 16 September 2010

Article Title: “Cognitive and Social Constructivism: Developing Tools for an Effective

Classroom.”

Authors: Kalina, Cody J., and Powell, Katherine C.

Publication: Academic Journal, Education

Date of Publication: Winter 2009, Vol. 130 Issue 2, p241-250

 Arciero 2

This article describes the importance of both types of constructivism in the classroom,

cognitive and social, and how each utilizes distinct tools and strategies to be effective.

Constructivism itself can be defined in most schools as “the best method for teaching and

learning” (Powell, Kalina 2). Both aid in making the learning process easier to understand for

students, but cognitive constructivism focuses on the individual’s rate of development while

social constructivism aims at furthering ideas through communication with others.

The cognitive constructivism process was founded by Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget’s

theory of cognitive development. His theory claims that students may be guided by teachers but

“cannot be given information… and must construct their own knowledge” (Powell, Kalina 3).

Piaget believed that humans learned by creating schemas, the basic building blocks of thought,

and through the four phases of development: the Sensorimotor stage, the preoperational stage,

the concrete operational stage, and the formal operational stage. Though based around certain

age boundaries, these phases stress the significance of individual attention for each student, and

that they discover knowledge for themselves at their own pace (Powell, Kalina 4).

On the other hand, the social constructivism approach was inspired by Russian

psychologist Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective. His point of view suggests that students

comprehend most efficiently when “in social interaction and that it is an integral part of

learning” (Powell, Kalina 4). Vygotsky believed in a zone of proximal development (ZPD),

which is the particular stage when a student can grasp a challenging concept through the

assistance of teachers or fellow peers. This theory has been proven true, as students exposed to

scaffolding, or support with problem solving, have been shown to retain more information this

way (Powell, Kalina 5).

 Arciero 3

The article’s concluding paragraphs comment on a comparison between the two types of

constructivism and their founders. While certainly different, they have one major similarity—the

way in which classrooms employing constructivism should be managed. According to Powell

and Kalina, “Both Piaget and Vygotsky agreed that the teacher’s role was that of a facilitator and

guide, and not of a director or dictator” (7). This means the instructor should promote both an

individually and socially welcoming atmosphere matter that does not dominate the student body.

There are numerous connections between this educational journal and topics mentioned

in Chapter Two of the textbook that agree with one another. The first parallel reference is of Jean

Piaget; both the article and the textbook go into great detail of his theory of cognitive

development. In addition to the four stages, the article also refers to assimilation and

accommodation, which the book defines as “the two processes involved in adaptation”

(Woolfolk 33). The process of equilibration, or the search for balance between one’s mind and

the outside world, is stated in both texts as well (Powell, Kalina 3).

Yet another example of similarities linking this article and Chapter Two are Lev

Vygotsky and his sociocultural approach to learning. Each mentions his sponsorship of

cooperative collaboration between students and social interaction with teachers. Furthermore,

they both bring up Vygotsky’s belief that cultural tools, from material tools like computers to

psychological tools like language, “play very important roles in cognitive development”

(Woolfolk 44). He stressed that the cultural influences begotten from communication strengthen

students’ capacity to learn, and that teachers “should recognize the diversity of the class and

embrace their differences” (Powell, Kalina 5).

 Arciero 4

I believe that the main points in this article can be applied to my own future classroom

and teaching style. While Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s perspectives are mostly aimed at younger

students, this educational journal’s mentioning of cognitive and social constructivism can most

definitely pertain to high school students too. My dream as a secondary education English

teacher is to instill in adolescents a greater familiarity and fondness of reading and appreciating

written works. In doing so I hope to explore and expand my students’ imaginations.

I believe that the most important part of teaching is the building of a relationship of trust

between the instructor and his or her students. True, good grades and learning the course material

are important too, but I want my students to look forward to my class, know that each is special

in his or her own way, and leave as better-rounded people.

I can utilize Piaget’s theory of cognitive constructivism with an emphasis on English by

giving my students individually based homework. For example, I could assign my class to read

any additional readings at home to prepare themselves for questions the following day. If I am

pleased with the class’ responses, they would be exempt from the quiz. This would not only

enable my students to gain self-taught knowledge and develop their reading skills, but it would

also encourage them to enjoy what they are reading without the pressure of being tested on

specific material.

I can utilize Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism with an emphasis on English by

assigning several class projects or discussion periods—preferably picked at random. I would

choose the groups at random because I would never want to leave anyone out (I know how that

feels from personal experience,) and doing so would allow students to meet and get to know

others outside of their usual social crowds. It would also help teach the students how to
 Arciero 5

cooperate and learn in a social setting with others’ ideas and suggestions. Furthermore, these

interactive activities would help augment the students’ communication skills and hopefully

expose them to their fellow peers’ ideas, beliefs, and cultures.

I also believe it to be very important that in both types of constructivism, the

psychologists made it a point that the instructor not force-feed the information, but guide the

students through it. One way in which I think I can exercise this is through giving brief

PowerPoint presentations or concise video clips. I hope to present only the main points of the

course material, instead of all the particulars. Once I establish a general idea of the concept

(whether it is how to write an essay or a poem analysis,) I can encourage the students to give me

their own thoughts. This will promote the students to speak their minds, thereby encouraging

them to have confidence in their ideas, learn how to explain their opinions, and think creatively

and intelligently.

All in all, I want to teach in a positive, encouraging manner. From personal experience, I

know the importance of compliments and constructive criticism, instead of negative criticism or

no feedback at all. Although it is still somewhat debated whether a cognitive constructivism or

social constructivism approach is more beneficial or effective in classroom learning, I believe

that a balanced interweaving of both approaches is best. I think that by giving some assignments

individually and others as group projects, I can use both methods to their best capacity and teach

my students how to work individually and cooperatively, thus helping them to discover and

surpass their learning potential.

 Arciero 6

Works Cited

Powell, Katherine C., and Cody J. Kalina. "Cognitive and Social Constructivism: Developing

Tools for an Effective Classroom.” Education 130.2 (2009): 241-250. Education

Research Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Sept. 2010.

Woolfolk, Anita. Educational Psychology. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson

Education, 2010. Print.