[IAEP] Concise explanation of Constructionism from the LearningTeam

[Albert Cahalan]

On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 3:31 AM, Costello, Rob R
<Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:

> I work in a real world school, and its not what it means there

Consider yourself lucky. Perhaps your school is just special.
Perhaps your whole country is special. In any case, you're in
an uphill battle if lots of people have a different definition.
Your message gets mangled when you choose words that
your listener will interpret differently than you.

Here it means disasters like "Everyday Mathematics",
"Mathland", and "Connected Mathematics".

> The challenge is how to balance the need for lots of instruction while
> preserving the spirit of inquiry

Typically, constructionism is against instruction. Balance is
not allowed; it can not be allowed when instruction is made
out to be the great evil.

> Not entirely sure if you're just wanting to get a rise out of polarised
> points of view, where accuracy or ability to see the whole isn't really
> a priority

I was quite open minded about constructionism, but I believe
that the purpose of an open mind is to close on the truth.
Initially I was curious. I became annoyed and suspicious as
it became obvious that evidence was lacking and that nobody
could explain things in a way that was clear, concise, useful,
unambiguous, and so on. Then, during some other research,
I stumbled upon the horror of constructionism as practiced
and I found the evidence that constructionists would suppress.
It's time to get the word out: constructionism hurts children.

Maybe in some theoretical ideal world, there could exist
some form of constructionism that is not rotten to the core.
We don't live in that world, so let's not concern ourself with it.

> If not, and you just happen to feel strongly on the issue, you might be
> interested in this
> http://www.learningtolearn.sa.edu.au/Colleagues/files/links/Teaching_and
> _Learning_in_a.doc

I find straw men. The writer imagines that traditional instruction
is purely memorization. The writer expects me to accept on faith
that one's immature and uneducated peers are learning aids.
The writer admits to horrible inefficiencies that require the use
of extra hours and possibly extra teachers.

It sounds like some people are still trying to recover from some
nun who whacked them with a ruler every time they failed to
perfectly regurgitate some useless trivia. Sorry if that's the
case... but regular education is mostly not like that.