Extra bits for assignment - social construction

Quantitative data from the positivist paradigm still directs and influences much contemporary educational policy (Adams, 2006). In the terms of scientific measurements it is considered as providing reliable, predictable and replicable data at scale and a preferred (EdD paper). 

Adams (2006) argues that using such means in education misses two fundamental points, firstly that aspects of learning occur in the mind, and secondly that behaviour in tests is not a reliable indicator of the cognitive processes that occur in learning, but they are as (Easen and Bolden, 2005; p.53) describe a surface manifestation of possible underlying competencies. With Ball (1999, p.204) adding that what is never asked is whether the measures used in performance data actually represent valid, worthwhile or meaningful outputs. 

For many teachers when they discuss learning they don’t refer to performance outcomes measured numerically, they usually talk about what learning is and how to promote it (Adams, 2006). The connection between learning and performance is simplistic (MacGilchrist, 2003) and doesn’t account for the nuances of how learning happens in the mind and not a reliable indicator of the cognitive processes that occur in learning, but they are as (Easen and Bolden, 2005; p.53) 

Learning as an active process of meaning making (Silcock, 2003) and the ability to make sense of one’s own experience of learning as the product of socio-cultural contexts (Adams, 2006). 

Educational interventions or initiatives all too often remain measured in terms of tests but discussions about learning encourage teachers to analyse pedagogy from the point of view of the learner (Adams, 2006).

The nature of constructivist learning seeks to understand how pupils create their knowledge and that each learner will construct knowledge differently (Adams, 2006).

Implicit within the social constructivist position is the need to focus on the learner and their process of learning and not the subject matter to be taught (Adams, 2006), and the view learners as co-constructors of meaning and knowledge (Hein, 1992; Tam, 2000).

, …whilst simultaneously recognising that there is no knowledge independent of the meaning attributed to experience by the learner within the learning community (Hein, 1991).

Social constructivism posits that existing knowledge structures and beliefs support or militate against new learning (Shepard, 2000).

Social construction of knowledge emphasises the role of others in the individual construction of knowledge and is primarily a social process (Shepard, 2000). Such interactions provide opportunities for learning to be scaffolded through the shared interrogation both with and by peers (Torrance and Pryor, 1998).

Teachers working together will support and scaffold each others learning, most especially by playing active roles in supporting each other towards their learning and development of teaching a new subject.

As a counter point, the social constructivist oriented teacher is positioned as the facilitator (Copley, 1992), organiser and potential source of information (Hanley, 1994; Crowther, 1997). In this research context, as the subject expert mentor in the lesson study, the researcher acts as the teacher.

Vygotsky’s theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the difference between what a learner can do independently and what they can achieve with the support of a significant other (Adams, 2006).

Social constructivist epistemology locates knowledge, not as objective and context devoid but rather as contextually driven and an intrapersonal creation (Adams, 2006).

Social construction of knowledge can be swayed by social perception and that can influence the choices and responses to these objects or beliefs in reality (Keaton and Bodie, 2011). Meaning and perception of constructs and how they are defined in reality can influence behaviour, including how it is communicated to others. Similarly, how we understand something from the world of theory in comparison to how we understand or experience it in practice can also help how connections are made (Carlson, 1999). 

In digital accessibility the guidance available is …discipline of IT…..perceived as complex…. and these constructs may hinder initial engagement in the subject. It would therefore be important to gauge prior knowledge or existing beliefs in the planning phase of the research. 

Social constructivism provides a framework for understanding relationships between the learner and instructor and acts as a vehicle for empowerment (Carlson, 1999; Vygotsky, 1986; 1934).

It would be interesting to gather ideas from the world of practice in the classroom and compare or contrast that to what is currently published about digital accessibility awareness from another discipline (Carlson, 1999).

The problem according to David and Sumara (2002) is that theories created in one academic discipline cannot easily be transferred to another without taking into account the fact that the two fields may have very different concerns, goals and concepts.

 Constructivist studies are contextual and situated.

Constructivist teaching practices are becoming prevalent in teacher education programs, while demonstrating significant success in promoting student learning (Davis and Sumara, 2002; Fang and Ashley, 2004; Gordon and O’Brien, 2007; Marlowe and Page, 2005; Oxford, 1997; Richardson, 1997).

There are so many interpretations of constructivism…

There is concern that teachers’ experiences and knowledge are not generally considered legitimate resources that can be used to evaluate and revise educational theory, and equally what counts as educational research is oblivious to the valuable insights that teachers can bring to research (Kincheloe, 1991). 

This study combines both with researchers and teachers acting as co-researchers and co-producers of knowledge.

Knowledge construction involves an integration of individual cognitive processes and social processes (Gordon, 2009).

Dudley (2011)

Many people who have used lesson study said that focusing on and thus becoming more aware of learning needs and behaviours (p.5)

Dudley (2011) gives an example of multiple realities and the complexity of the classroom context. He says that classrooms are amongst the most complex working environments in which professionals have to operate. The amount of information that is generated by 30 or so learners engaged in lesson activities over the course of an hour is vast (p.4).

Dudley (2011) lesson study consists of a cycle of at least three ‘research lessons’ that are jointly planned, taught, observed and evaluated by a lesson study group (p.6).

Dudley (2011) suggests three teachers works well for lesson study (p.6).

Dudley (2011) analysis needs to start with the observation of the students (p.12).

Using lesson study not only uses the teachers voice, but also captures the learners experience and feedback of the lessons. Alongside the educational design based research approach that also combines the stakeholder of researcher as part of the process this framework offers an opportunity to triangulate a broad range of perspectives to make the insights robust.

Dudley (2015) lesson study group members (usually three) 

Dudley (2015) they plan each research lesson with three particular pupils in mind, these are case pupils (Dudley, 2003; Chichibu, 2014).

Rather than observing teaching, they observe pupils learning in the situated context of being taught (Dudley, 2015).

Dudley (2015) such a wealth of highly detailed information fuels productive analysis and informs subsequent revisions of the pedagogical or curricular approaches being developed, in great detail and depth.

Dudley (2015) in almost every lesson study group (Dudley, 2015) claims that after their first research lesson every group of teachers discover that their case pupils learn in a different way to that predicted by the group.

Dudley (2015) lesson study creates many of the components of learning that are described by socio-cultural theory. 

Dudley (2915, p.22) the knowledge generated by the third research lesson in the sequence is usually much richer in depth, insight and replicability that the first.

For many years scholars have been calling for collaboration between teachers and researchers to maximise the benefits of lesson study (Fernandez, 2002; 2005; Lewis et al, 2006; Oshima et al, 2006). A new form of lesson study called ‘design study’ which is lesson study combined with design research aimed at combining and integrating the research expertise of university researchers with the teaching expertise of school teachers (Dudley, 2015; p.34).