Constructivist Approaches to Education: Fostering Student Construction of Knowledge

For undergraduate college students in Virginia Tech’s Psychological Foundations of Education class, students are taught various learning theories. In this interactive practice session, presenters will highlight Constructivist Learning Theory and cover three main points of interest. First, presenters will discuss the foundational framework for constructivism by providing background and history on a few of the most influential scholars. In our second area of focus, we will compare and contrast the settings of the constructivist classroom to that of the traditional classroom. Presenters will define the specific roles and responsibilities of both the constructivist teacher and student. Our last main area of focus is to explain the characteristics of both radical and social constructivism. Through this explanation, we will shed light on some of the controversy surrounding the pedagogical and epistemological ideas about constructivism. Presenters will explain and demonstrate practical and engaging strategies for guiding current and future teachers in the process of achieving a constructivist environment in their classrooms. Participants from any discipline may gain a new perspective, as well as useful strategies for future classroom use in this presentation. As a result of this session, participants should be able to: • Identify the foundational groundwork including the people who have influenced constructivist ideals. • Compare and contrast the settings of the constructivist and traditional classrooms. • List specific roles and responsibilities for both the constructivist teacher and student. • Explore resources (provided) for future research in promoting teaching strategies for constructivism. • Emphasize the importance of constructivism in an effort to have future teachers weave characteristics into the “culture” of their classes. • Consider the characteristics of both radical and social constructivism, and the controversies that lie within this learning theory

The Effects of Mind Mapping Activities on Students\u27 Motivation

We examined how students‟ motivation differed when they participated in three different types of mind mapping activities: one activity that was completed individually outside of class time, one that was completed individually in class with the instructor available for help, and one that was completed in class with other students and the instructor available for help. Using the MUSIC Model of Academic Motivation (Jones, 2009) as a framework, we implemented a concurrent mixed methods design using identical samples whereby the quantitative component was dominant over the qualitative component. Participants included 40 undergraduate students enrolled in an educational psychology course at a U.S. university. After each of the mind mapping activities, study participants completed questionnaires that included open- and closed-ended items. Although the three activities had similar effects on students‟ motivation-related beliefs, some differences were documented in their preferences of mind mapping activities. Instructional implications are provided

The Effects of Mind Mapping Activities on Students' Motivation

We examined how students‟ motivation differed when they participated in three different types of mind mapping activities: one activity that was completed individually outside of class time, one that was completed individually in class with the instructor available for help, and one that was completed in class with other students and the instructor available for help. Using the MUSIC Model of Academic Motivation (Jones, 2009) as a framework, we implemented a concurrent mixed methods design using identical samples whereby the quantitative component was dominant over the qualitative component. Participants included 40 undergraduate students enrolled in an educational psychology course at a U.S. university. After each of the mind mapping activities, study participants completed questionnaires that included open- and closed-ended items. Although the three activities had similar effects on students‟ motivation-related beliefs, some differences were documented in their preferences of mind mapping activities. Instructional implications are provided