Unit Seven Reflective Paper
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Unit Seven Reflective Paper

on

  • 337 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
337
Views on SlideShare
337
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Unit Seven Reflective Paper Document Transcript

  • 1. Running Head: UNIT SEVEN 1 Unit Seven: Reflective Paper Constructivist’s Perspective Lauren Fowler-Carter University of Houston – Clear Lake
  • 2. UNIT SEVEN 2 Unit Seven: Reflective Paper Constructivist’s Perspective As far as criticism towards constructivism, there are various issues that critics suggest.One criticism that critics charge is that constructivism is elitist, suggesting that this theory ismore successful with students from “privileged backgrounds who are fortunate in havingoutstanding teachers, committed parents, and rich home environments” (EducationalBroadcasting Corporation, 2004). This is an arguable suggestion, because depending on one’sviews and opinions about constructivism, this suggestion could be elitist itself. To counter thestatement about privileged backgrounds, the drive or motivation of the students should be takeninto consideration. One could argue that those from privileged backgrounds are more motivatedto learn than others, or vice versa. I believe that there are a lot of factors that can and should betaken into consideration before suggesting that constructivism is elitist. Another issue that critics have with constructivism is that when group think is involved,dominate students will have their voices and interpretations lead other students to conform to thegroup (Educational Broadcasting Corporation, 2004). The last issue that critics have withconstructivism that I will mention, is that by eliminating evaluation through formal testing,leaves constructivists to be “unaccountable for their students’ progress” (EducationalBroadcasting Corporation, 2004). The suggestion that the teachers that follow constructivism areunaccountable for the progression of their students could be argued to be a falsified suggestion. Ican see the points from both perspectives, but in a way, those who implement constructivism intheir classroom become more accountable for their learners progress. Though there isn’t formalevaluation for the learners, when they advance on to more intense courses and do not havenecessary skills that should have be gained with the constructivist instructor, then that instructor
  • 3. UNIT SEVEN 3is accountable. Also if there are many students advancing on that do not have appropriate skillsthat should have been learned in the constructivist’s course, then this instructor’s teaching stylesneed to be re-evaluated by a superior. Regardless of if an instructor decides to implementconstructivism in their class, they must equip their students with specific knowledge and skills inorder to advance on in their education without being hindered.
  • 4. UNIT SEVEN 4 ReferencesEducational Broadcasting Corporation. (2004). Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Retrieved November 16, 2011, from Thirteen: http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html