Online ISSN: 2325-7466
2006
Triannual
National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET)
United States

Articles

Constructivism, Zone of Proximal Development and Target in a Multi-Dimensional Classroom

  • Bradley Johnson, Ph.D. (Author)
    Bradley W. Johnson, Ph.D., is a support facilitation teacher in an Elementary School for the St. Johns County School District in Florida. He works with students in grades K-5 providing instructional support in the areas of reading and math. Bradley has the opportunity to teach in the special education field for the past 10 years in the Autism Spectrum Disorder, Emotional/Behavior Disability, Specific Learning Disability, and Intellectual Disabilities. He serves as a board member of the Down Syndrome Association of Jacksonville provides many different service opportunities for families in a multi-county area.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.427
Abstract
Constructivism represents a heterogeneous body of theoretical approaches across different disciplines for these alliances, as well as, attracting and antagonizing vast audiences within these disciplines, including psychology and education. A major influence on the rise of constructivism has been the theory and research in human development. Classroom characteristics, including motivation, can affect the perceptions and learning of students. By focusing on these factors within the classroom, teachers and students are able to work in a multidimensional classroom. Multidimensional classrooms have more activities and allow for greater diversity in student abilities performances, as well as being more compatible with constructivist tenants about learning. The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) opens the possibility for new interpretations of a development as a social construction and undermines the traditional assumption that development is independent from observers, researchers, and educators who can recognize certain aspects of the activity.
Keywords
Classroom Environment, Classroom Techniques, Constructivism (Learning), Learning Motivation, Learning Theories, Models
References

Ames, C. (1992a). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.). Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327-348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ames, C. (1992b). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.84.3.261

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper’s World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007021

Bredo, E. (1997). The social construction of learning. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of academic learning: The construction of knowledge (pp. 3-45). New York: Academic Press. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., Norby, M. M., & Ronning, R. R. (2004). Cognitive psychology and instruction (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028002004

Derry, S. J. (1996). Cognitive schema theory in the constructivist debate. Educational Psychologist, 31, 163-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3103&4_2

Duffy, G. G. (1993). Rethinking strategy instruction: Four teachers' development and their low achievers' understandings. The Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 231-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/461724

Epstein, J. L. (1989). Family structures and student motivation: A developmental perspective. In C. Ames & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Teaching thinking skill: Theory and practice (Vol. 3, pp. 259-295). San Diego: Academic Press.

Geary, D. C. (1995). Reflections of evolution and culture in children’s cognition: Impli for mathematical development and instruction. American Psychologist, 50, 24-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.50.1.24

Gergen, K. J. (1994). Realities and relationships. Sounding in social construction. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.

Greeno, J. G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44, 134-141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.44.2.134

Heylighen, F. (1993). Epistemology, introduction. Principia Cybernetica. Available at: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/EPISTEMI.html

Hoover, W. A. (1996). The practice implications of constructivism. SED Letter, 9(3), Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (1996). Toward a technology for assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25, 215-227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1996.12085812

Matusov, E., DePalma, R., & Drye, S. (2007). Whose development: Salvaging the concept of development within a sociocultural approach to education. Educational Theory, 57(4), 403-421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2007.00265.x

Moshnam, D. (1982). Exogenous, endogenous, and dialectical, constructivism. Developmental Review, 2, 371-384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(82)90019-3

Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivism: From Philosophy to Practice.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH Pub. No. 00-4754.

Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X024007005

Prawat, R. (1996). Constructivisms, modern and postmodern. Educational Psychology, 31(3), 215-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3103&4_6

Rosenholtz, S. J., & Rosenholtz, S. H. (1981). Classroom organization and the perception of ability. Sociology of Education, 54, 132-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2112357

Rosenholtz, S. J., & Simpson, C. (1984). The formation of ability conceptions: Developmental trend or social construction? Review of Educational Research, 54, 31-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543054001031

Schunk, D. H. (2008). Learning theories: An educational perspective (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.

Steffe, L. & Gale, J. (Eds.) (1995). Constructivism in education. NJ: Erlbaum Tudge, J. R. H., & Scrimsher, S. (2003). Lev S. Vygotsky on education: A cultural-historical, interpersonal, and individual approach to development. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Educational psychology: A century of contributions (pp. 207-228). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Vianna, E., & Stetsenko, A. (2006). Embracing history through transforming it. Theory and Psychology, 16(1), 81-108.von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick, The Invented Reality, (pp.17-40). New York: W.W. Norton & Company. von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Constructivism in education. In T. Husen & N. Postlewaite (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education [Suppl.], (pp.162-163). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

There are 28 references in total.
How to Cite
Johnson, B. (2020). Constructivism, Zone of Proximal Development and Target in a Multi-Dimensional Classroom. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 15(2), 84-93. https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.427

Spring/Summer 2020

Article Information

  • Article Type Articles
  • Submitted May 12, 2020
  • Published June 15, 2020
  • Issue Spring/Summer 2020
  • Section Articles
  • File Downloads 0
  • Abstract Views 0
  • Altmetrics
  • Share
Download data is not yet available.