Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of the constructivist approach in furthering children's genuine understanding of science. Discuss the use of this approach within the contemporary primary classroom.

In one’s personal experience a mixture of the two viewpoints were represented whilst placed upon school practise. Pupils were encouraged to work together in one of two sessions (the first theory the second practical) in mixed ability groups, to share a variety of ideas freely with each other during experiments, and use modern scientific instruments to extend their intellectual capabilities. Unfortunately the time in which was to do this was in reduced, in restrictive periods that caused staff to halt learning and continue in a slot with a class of children who did not fully comprehend the curriculum concept, and required additional time to investigate materials and events, to form their own interpretations, without the use of direct teaching.

Elicitation is the process of requiring and enabling children to make explicit the ideas inside their minds (Lecturers note taken at the University of Hull). It enforces the need for thinking about thinking, a successful practice known as a meta-cognitivism which encourages the development of autonomous, reflective learners. The procedure may be described as rather more ‘focused and formative’ than that of orientation as this is the stage an educator will establish in systemic manner, a baseline of children’s prior and current understanding within the target scientific area. The manner in which this information is gathered shares many similarities with that of a ‘formative assessment’; as it clarifies a number of starting points so that teaching may be precisely targeted (Assessing Progress in Primary Science).

Consequently during elicitation it is necessary that the instructor maintains children’s motivation and enjoyment, particularly to establish their intellectual commitment to their expressed ideas.

However this can not be accomplished unless the children are situated within an environment which is free from criticism and ridicule and the informant’s response is encouraging, supportive and non-censorious in the face of scientifically fragile thinking. Saunders 1992 compliments these comments and adds that it is essential that all value children’s expression of ideas if they wish to fully understand how children are thinking and for those individuals to become active in their own learning.

In order for the elicitation phase to occur within the education sector, research has displayed that teacher’s must use a varied repertoire of elicitation strategies and techniques, according to the nature of the topic under consideration and the abilities of the target age group (The Science Teacher). In primary schools this guidance to support the integration of the constructivism approach has been successfully adapted in the eyes of many academics. Patricia A Ainsa  informs others in the teaching profession in her article ‘’ that her staff use mind mapping tools such as concepts maps, cartoon concepts and floor books to organize science notions and document the children's level of constructed understanding. She wrote ‘the process made the evaluation of children's understanding and curriculum planning and evaluation easy to document while imposing clarity and reinforcing and focusing the overall learning construction.’ Others educators supported points in this piece and indicated in a survey that they would begin use mind mapping techniques for planning, recording, reorganizing etcetera although they did express that they would continue to use older methods such as annotated drawings to evaluate new understandings gained in science due to the imposed clarity of thought, the visual orientation, and the simplicity of the technique.

One is agreement that this stage in the constructivist cycle is possible to integrate into the current classroom climate and implement as the practise is already present in other forms. From attending meetings, completing elicitation based directed tasks and contributing to discussions upon this matter with other professionals, this personal insight is supported. Staff from placement institutions spoke of elicitation as a method which has built upon the norm methods of discovering pupil’s conceptions and has adapted well under the current restraints of external assessment in science.

Once ideas have been elicited the need for direct transmission of knowledge is reduced and instead it becomes necessary to support children’s developing of understanding (Wheatley (1991)). He believed this is achieved by introducing activities which reflect on pupil’s prior understanding and builds upon their ideas and investigative skills with new targets. He refers to this task as restructuring, which may also be identified in the education sector under a variety of names such as ‘intervention’ or simply ‘teaching’. The term is central to the constructivist approach as it is the point at which the teacher’s skills are specifically aimed at advancing the classes understanding. Due to the notion that children should maintain an active role in their own learning as it is fundamental to assessment practices, restructuring is defined as assisting children to develop their ideas (Saunders 1992).  Restructuring activities may take various forms, but a recurring cycle of three stages can be identified as found in writing by Brooks (1993). 

Stage one:  Following the identification of the particular ideas to which a child shows some commitment, the teacher requests some evidence or justification for the expressed view.

Stage two: The teacher then supports children in their evidence gathering activities. These may include empirical investigation or reference to secondary sources of information.

Stage three: The teacher asks the children to make explicit their evidence based ideas. This is integral to the process of knowledge construction and an important meta-cognitive mechanism. ‘

Thus, it can be summarised that the restructuring phrase is one in which teaching and learning can be evidence based, an essential requirement within primary school science lessons, just as it is in real scientific enquires, which encourages the expression of representations and shifting between one way of expressing an idea and another, to gather a true understanding of the particular subject.

In theory the restructuring stage does portray the ability to be successful as it is direct in its requirements, clear within its expectations and consistent in its outcomes to ensure that children’s understanding in science is furthered. Yager 1991 has produced several materials on the matter. However in practise this area of the constructivism process has highlighted several underlying issues which can be problematic during teaching of a scientific focus in a modern classroom. (Carey 1994)

First, restructuring cannot be viewed as the transmission of knowledge from enlightened to unenlightened; constructivist science teachers can not take the role of the "sage on the stage." Rather, teachers act as "guides on the side" who provide students with opportunities to test the adequacy of their current understandings. A difficult skill to acquire as the teacher is to relinquish his/her role as sole information-dispenser and instead to continually analyze his/her curriculum planning and instructional methodologies.

Second, if learning and activities are based on prior knowledge, then teachers must note that knowledge and provide learning environments that exploit inconsistencies between learners' current understandings and the new experiences before them. This challenges teachers; for they cannot assume that all children understand something in the same way. Further, children may need different experiences to advance to different levels of understanding.

Third, if new knowledge is actively built, then time is needed to build it. Children need a period within the core curriculum lessons so that new ideas can be firstly understood by them, believed and supported by evidence, applied constantly in a variety of situations and eventually explain phenomena more satisfactorily to the child than their existing ideas. Teachers are often tempered to cover ‘ground’ at the expense of giving time to build on their ideas obviously an action which cause considerable concern.

From the points raised by both researchers upon restructuring, one feels that before feeling confident to meet the requirements set out by this phase that the issues spoke of are addressed before one would fully implement the stage within the classroom. Although time allocation appears to be one of the main stumbling points, one feel it is also important to note the manner in which teachers are guided to teach the subject as this too is influencing the effectiveness of the practise. All need to be informed by advisors of learning activities that they can apply in their own classrooms. It is not enough to be told of new ways of teaching and to be expected to translate from talk to action; it is more effective to engage staff in activities that will lead to new actions and improvements within the classroom.

The concluding stage of the constructivist cycle is recognised as the review sector where one re-evaluates, assesses alterations in ideas and investigative skills and begins to set new objectives. (Lecturers note taken at the University of Hull). One feels it is necessary for both the child and educator to reflect upon targets which have been set and the level of understanding which has been achieved.

The viewpoint portrayed by the QCA 2003 is that when a child reviews it should be based upon their own understanding, rather than the unreflective rote learning. They suggest methods in which this requirement can be met, such as the explanation of their newly formulated ideas with supporting evidence within the context of class presentations; or receiving feedback directly from their peers and teachers in a process of social validation; or in the form of summative assessment; therefore, a constructively self-critical review of their performance. Many informed commentators believe the purpose of a meta-cognitive activity is to ensure that children are conscious of their beliefs and gain the necessary experience in questioning the evidence in which these thoughts are based. (Brook 1993) The constructivist approach emphasises the need for both the acquisition of new representations and the evidence in which to support them. Therefore, the review phase ensures that all of these elements combine in the development of autonomous, reflective and self critical learner–individuals who are aware of what they know as well as what they have yet to understand.

Again this is a stage which will require careful thought and planning in a contemporary classroom, self assessment can be time consuming and it would have to be debated in which mannerisms this should be completed and whether it would be appropriate to review after each session or after each attainment based topic. Some schools have introduced actual feedback forms for children to complete which focus upon building awareness of children’s own developments in understanding and setting their own personal targets. Stokesley Community Primary is a successful example of this.   However other institutions such as the ……………….believe that before a child is asked to assess their new knowledge and understanding, teachers should reflect on both the efficacy of their classroom strategies and children’s learning outcomes, which acknowledges children’s development limits, to inform and support this progress.

        

From completing review based tasks with the classes personally across the curriculum on many occasions, one can understand the reasons behind each establishment key points. One has seen the effectiveness of the review procedure in action and support it use within the classroom and believe it is necessary to stress for both the teacher and the children to reflect upon what has been learnt for future reference and assessment.

As one has reached the end of deliberations about the constructivist approach, its differing sectors and their effectiveness and place within today’s primary environments one now feels it is appropriate to draw a conclusion to the entirety of the question set. One believes that this piece of writing has demonstrated the potential effectiveness of the procedure in furthering children’s genuine understanding of science, and has displayed this has yet to be completely fulfilled in today’s classrooms as there are some still some outstanding areas for improvement. It has been understood that the sectors such as orientation and elicitation and review have in part already been incorporated into evolving schools however issues such as time allocations creating by national initiatives and disagreements amongst academics in which they are portrayed have effect the extent to which they have flourished. The other main area under scrutiny was that of restructuring, that too shared outcomes which caused concern and delayed progress such as misconceptions about the subject and style of teaching to accompany it, although with the correct support and guidance this too will be rectified.

Constructivism has been proven to represents one of the titanic upcoming ideas in education. Its implications for how teachers teach and learn to teach are enormous. If efforts in reforming education for all children are to succeed, then we must focus in on the nation’s primary pupils.

Listening to individuals as they discuss ideas together is an excellent method to start shifting the balance of responsibility to the learner. Another step is using primary sources and raw data as the basis of inquiry, rather than relying solely on the text.  In the next two or three decades, research will change the way most of the accepted facts of today are perceived. The challenge one mist overcome is to foster children's abilities appropriately so they can continue to learn and build their understanding based on the changing world of science around them.

Word Count: 2, 776 words

---