![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Generating constructivist learning among students. More commonly called constructivist teaching, the process of generating constructivist learning among students is not clearly mapped. Teachers must develop processes that encourage students in their quest to construct understanding. Teachers are actively constructing what it means to teach.
To actually do so--whether developing approaches from scratch or using existing curricular materials in final or field test form--requires that teachers rethink and reconstruct their approaches to teaching as well as their understanding of their subject matter. They often must learn new techniques that are a odds with their own education and experience.
At many case study sites teachers were grappling admirably with various elements of the process, be it understanding and using new instructional approaches or understanding subject matter in new ways to assist students in asking the questions necessary to get "unstuck". But the intersection of teacher beliefs and new practice is also the greatest hurdle in all sites, as some teachers are more primed for the change than others. Their paths out of their individual quagmires differ, but as with students, these processes need time and effort to develop.
Each teacher at each site is at a different place along the continuum to constructivist teaching. As is evident in each of the cases, teachers have moved varying distances from where they were when the process began. Some saw mostly frustration and inner conflict, while others experienced major successes in changing their teaching.
Developing the role of facilitator. Unlike many reform efforts that came before, constructivist teaching and learning requires extensive teacher growth. This growth generally includes identifying existing beliefs and examining the congruency of these beliefs and the reform's goals and purposes. These processes occur in the teacher's active use of the new role. Because this new role is so tied to teacher beliefs and identity, it is probably the most difficult aspect of constructivist teaching to embrace. Again the observed teachers are making strides. For some it is learning the name of a process that is a part of their existing practice, even if in rudimentary form. For others it is more effectively stepping back or letting go. For others it is refining questioning techniques or developing better tasks that elicit and encourage student learning. Teachers are developing new roles incrementally in some instances, and by leaps and bounds in others.
Assessing learning of students. Most teachers have not yet fully developed a process of assessing their students' learning from a constructivist orientation; many have only a glimmer of a vision of the personal development they need in this area. Teachers see new forms of assessment as a natural outgrowth of the changes they are making in student learning and many teachers are slowly trying and testing new approaches. Outside forces, however--in the form of program developers, policy agents (e.g. legislators)--are accelerating teachers' developmental time line. This pressure is exacerbating the tension between many teacher's learning and practice because the new assessment approaches do not easily fit their traditional classes or their traditional thinking. As with the development of other aspects of constructivist teaching, teachers are learning to generate, use, and score new types of assessments. It is an additional dimension of teacher learning.
Where these new assessment practices intersect with student grades, they generate new concerns for teachers, students, parents and administrators. Simple knowledge was much easier to assess. From years of precedence and practice, traditional paper and pencil assessments generate reliable, valid and generalizable results. The new authentic, context-based assessment of skills, knowledge and process--while potentially more valuable--are unfamiliar. More about this aspect of reform outcomes will be discussed below under Outcomes for Second Tier Change Participants.
More students exhibit outcomes. The reform efforts are targeted for all students. In the high school level, case studies indications are that students not previously well served by traditional programs in science and mathematics are succeeding and enjoying the reform classes so much that they are electing to continue in the programs after they have met high school graduation requirements. They feel a confidence not demonstrated in previous learning situations and are doing more intellectually. This outcome is documented by increasing numbers of sections of most reform classes. So students are learning more by participating over more years.
Quantitative data demonstrates that students do as well, and in some cases better, on traditional tests at these sites.
Students exhibit thinking skills. Changes in the learning process have led to different assessments. Students are now asked to demonstrate the fruits of their new classroom role by presenting their knowledge in multiple formats and measured against new criteria. Teacher growth in the development of rubrics to define standards for these new assessments is important for clarifying expected student outcomes. Where students have clear understandings of the standards--e.g. quality work, synthesis of knowledge and skills--student outcomes are impressive.
The nature of these assessments make traditional quantification difficult. At present in most reform sites students are doing as well on traditional assessments as they have in the past and are doing better on open-ended assessments than students in traditional programs. As practices become more refined, more and better ways to view assessments and report their results will also evolve.
Students experience contextualized learning. The "less is more" theme, coupled with integrated content embedded in contexts familiar to students and with practical applications, not only teaches knowledge, process and skills, but also mirrors for students work place skills of communication, problem solving, quality work and cooperative effort.
Students become life-long, self-directed learners. While it is hazardous to make predictions about life-long changes, there are clear indications in the present of students who are becoming self-directed learners. Students who have participated in change efforts over multiple years generally report positively about their experiences, learning and gains.
An assessment of outcomes suggests that the reflective nature of the change process requires simultaneous learning at many levels. As seen here teacher learning occurs first and is greatest at most sites at this time. Students are next because of their proximity to teachers and their role is the true focal point of the process. Administrators, school personnel, program and staff developers and parents also are major players. The orchestration of this process is delicate.
-###-
[Assessment of Resources Required to Implement the Reforms]