Customer Reviews

In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I first read the 1993 edition in 1993, and I was sold on it. There is no more clear nor concise book on constructivist instructional design in the business. The book is practical and can be read quickly. It doesn't get bogged down in too much jargon or theory. I object to one critic who claims the book is "ivory tower" and leans to much on science and math examples. The book is just the opposite from "ivory tower" and as for math and science examples, as a science teacher who spent years reading theory pitched toward humanities teachers that I had to adapt to my realm, I found this book refreshing. I would counter that creative,constructivist, dedicated teachers of English, World Languages, and Social Sciences would be able to adapt the Brookses's examples to their fields with ease.

What I like most about this short, useful book, about this accessible, practical guide to constructivist teaching, about this handy guide, what I like most about this book is that it lays a foundation for much of the work that we are attempting to achieve with our curricular efforts using Understanding by Design. Written prior to Wiggins and McTieghe's works, The Case for Constructivist Classrooms supplies an epistemological background that places the UbD work into a workable context.
My reading gave me at least two epiphanies. First, while reading, I came to realize that most of my prior teaching, even with very good intentions, aims at a broad shot approach; if the student is on the same bandwidth, she will connect with me, but if not, the signal never picks up an audience while I simply keep broadcasting. My traditional teaching approaches, albeit well intentioned, never probe for deeper understanding because my methodologies never go there. That is, how can I expect my students to achieve deeper understanding when I do not allow them time to make inquiries? By keeping it shallow (due to time, coverage, and efficiency concerns), should I be surprised that their knowledge never runs deeply? Brooks and Brooks quote one of my favorite authors, Jerome Bruner, from his book, The Process of Education (1971), "Of only one thing am I convinced: I have never seen anybody improve in the art and technique of inquiry by any means other than engaging in inquiry." For Bruner, it seems, inquiry begets inquiry. If inquiry becomes the means of operation, knowledge will grow organicly, systemically, and finally, deeply.
Second, I came to realize how a classroom built on constructivist methodologies provides an educational culture that naturally engenders curiosity (something that seems to be utterly squelched in the middle school years) in students. Curiosity should not be the only realm of novice learner; rather, it must be the fuel converter that continually processes and assimilates inquiries into practical, working knowledge for the mature learner. The constructivist classroom works to nourish curiosity and encourage it. Therefore, it might mean that the classroom looks messy, is noisy, and lack efficiency, but oh well. The greater good of garnering curiosity in our students and just maybe, creating a life-long learner, outweighs the need for tidy rows and scope and sequence itineraries. The cacophonous newsroom and the cluttered studio seem to be better models for constructivist classrooms, not the factory model of bells and whistles.
Therefore, I urge you to read and take note of this sleeper.

The authors in this text present a clear and organized overview of constructivist learning that is accessible to the beginner interested in the topic. The text is geared toward primary education, but I have been able to implement modified constructivist techniques presented in the text in my college courses. Constructivism is valuable for any learner.

I am disturbed at the negative comments regarding this book. I would not suggest that the book is above critisim, but the current retoric outlined in other reviews is without intellectual substance and is demeaning to many learners. As a student in primary and secondary education I struggled in with traditional educational methods. (I also see the same traditional methods being inflicted on my children.... education is slow if not impossible to change!) Not until I reached college and entered design and architectural education did I realize that different methods of instruction could be used effectively. For those who look down on constructivist methodology they are also disregarding the excellent educational practices in disciplines such as architecture, music, theater, design, art, and other forms of learning that require students to make judgments and create tangible proposals that impact the quality of society. Many would like you to think that constructivism is a radical and "new" educational method. But actually it has been part of our learning process in many disciplines long before the educational community formally recognized the theory.

Without dedicated professors that mostly unknowingly implemented constructivist methods in undergraduate and graduate education I would have never made my way though architectural school and become a design professor. I use this book in my design studio when I have my students create architectural proposals for schools of the future. It is interesting to hear the rhetoric of protecting traditional educational methods that I have had to un-teach on the college level. The most common comment I receive from my college students when they read this book is "Why did I not get learn this way?"

The authors are to be commended on creating a text that is accessible and usable to diverse disciplines.

What I like most about this short, useful book, about this accessible, practical guide to constructivist teaching, about this handy guide, what I like most about this book is that it lays a foundation for much of the work that we are attempting to achieve with our curricular efforts using Understanding by Design. Written prior to Wiggins and McTieghe's works, The Case for Constructivist Classrooms supplies an epistemological background that places the UbD work into a workable context.

My reading gave me at least two epiphanies. First, while reading, I came to realize that most of my prior teaching, even with very good intentions, aims at a broad shot approach; if the student is on the same bandwidth, she will connect with me, but if not, the signal never picks up an audience while I simply keep broadcasting. My traditional teaching approaches, albeit well intentioned, never probe for deeper understanding because my methodologies never go there. That is, how can I expect my students to achieve deeper understanding when I do not allow them time to make inquiries? By keeping it shallow (due to time, coverage, and efficiency concerns), should I be surprised that their knowledge never runs deeply? Brooks and Brooks quote one of my favorite authors, Jerome Bruner, from his book, The Process of Education (1971), "Of only one thing am I convinced: I have never seen anybody improve in the art and technique of inquiry by any means other than engaging in inquiry." For Bruner, it seems, inquiry begets inquiry. If inquiry becomes the means of operation, knowledge will grow organicly, systemically, and finally, deeply.

Second, I came to realize how a classroom built on constructivist methodologies provides an educational culture that naturally engenders curiosity (something that seems to be utterly squelched in the middle school years) in students. Curiosity should not be the only realm of novice learner; rather, it must be the fuel converter that continually processes and assimilates inquiries into practical, working knowledge for the mature learner. The constructivist classroom works to nourish curiosity and encourage it. Therefore, it might mean that the classroom looks messy, is noisy, and lack efficiency, but oh well. The greater good of garnering curiosity in our students and just maybe, creating a life-long learner, outweighs the need for tidy rows and scope and sequence itineraries. The cacophonous newsroom and the cluttered studio seem to be better models for constructivist classrooms, not the factory model of bells and whistles.

Therefore, I urge you to read and take note of this sleeper.

This book is great introduction to Constructivist teaching. It is written to introduce theories that have been around for since Dewey and some could argue all the way back to Socrates. I strongly believe any teacher or educator can benefit from the ideas and thoughts in this small book. If you want more in-depth class examples look to Ron Berger's An Ethic of Excellence or Jill Ostrow's A room with a Different View. To claim these are just liberal ideas is to miss the point of this book. The basis that understanding will always be more important than rote learning, that student construct their own understanding of knowledge and teacher are better served helping them, than seeking "Rightness and Wrongness". I am been a student of both Constructivist and traditional methods and I remember and use the skills and knowledge I learned in the constructivist classroom and will continue to try and unlearn all the mislearning i learned in the traditional classroom.A Room With a Different View: First Through Third Graders Build Community and Create CurriculumAn Ethic of Excellence: Building a Culture of Craftsmanship with Students

If you are a progressive, constructivist eductor who does follow the drill and kill method, this is the book for you. It provides insight into why you should teach the way Piaget advocates and gives concreate examples of how to make your classroom truly constructivist. Think that school is boring our kids to death? Then you ust read this book. Become a better educator today!

In Search of Understanding is the most logical, and effective paradigm in education. It helped me clarify and understand my own thinking and also changed how I see the education process for my students. If you need iron-grip control of your classroom at all times, this book is not for you. If you are ready open your mind, your classroom, and your students to new possibilities, this is a step in the right direction.

If you're looking to reform your classroom and reform your teaching, this simple book is for you. Shouldn't teachers be focusing on learning for understanding? This can be read over a weekend, just enough time to implement change on Monday.

The fact that this book is written by a science professor and a district superintendent should say it all. The lack of day-to-day contact with public school classrooms shines through. This book is ivory tower thinking.

The anecdotal examples of constructivist classroom activities are nice, but they lean toward the math and science (surprise, surprise) where constructivist/problem solving activities should come rather naturally. Although the end of the book tries to save itself with six ways a teacher/educational system can be more progressive, the book all but ignores language arts and history (save one or two elementary anecdotes) and completely fails to make any sort of "case" for constructivism, as the title promises.

In education, it seems that anything goes. We want our students to build their knowledge in an independent fashion so we give lip-service to constructivist methods, and yet, with pressures of testing purely constructivist classrooms are simply not possible. For constructivism to work, there must be (a)a philosophical systemic change, (b)additional class time, and (c) a student culture interested in learning. None of these items are seriously addressed in the authors' nonexistent 'case'. Books by William Glasser, Alfie Kohn and Howard Gardner do a much better job of making a case and laying groundwork for progressivist classrooms.

All constructivist teachers should thank the lecture-style teachers who came before and actually taught students something. Without "prior knowledge," constructivism is an empty and vain endeavor, an exercise in futility. This book didn't address any studies on constructivist-taught students' ability to perform better on multiple choice tests. In fact, it talked down to multiple choice testing (of course), ignoring that such tests are the way--whether we like it or not--that students make it through the system. Not preparing them for such tests is a disservice, and contrary to the opinion of the author, there are multiple choice tests that engender inductive and inferential thinking.

Find another book to buy if you want enlightenment. The fact that teachers say they get something out of this book scares me. As an AP Lit teacher, I found this book was not the least bit enlightening.

The fact that this book is written by a science professor and a district superintendent should say it all. The lack of day-to-day contact with public school classrooms shines through. This book is ivory tower thinking.

The anecdotal examples of constructivist classroom activities are nice, but they lean toward the math and science (surprise, surprise) where constructivist/problem solving activities should come rather naturally. Although the end of the book tries to save itself with twelve ways a teacher can be more progressive, the book all but ignores language arts and history (save one or two elementary anecdotes) and completely fails to make any sort of "case" for constructivism, as the title promises.

In education, it seems that anything goes. We want our students to build their knowledge in an independent fashion so we give lip-service to constructivist methods, and yet, with pressures of testing purely constructivist classrooms are simply not possible. For constructivism to work, there must be (a)a philosophical systemic change, (b)additional class time, and (c) a student culture interested in learning. None of these items are seriously addressed in the authors' nonexistent 'case'. Books by William Glasser, Alfie Kohn and Howard Gardner do a much better job of making a case and laying groundwork for progressivist classrooms.

All constructivist teachers should thank the lecture-style teachers who came before and actually taught students something. Without "prior knowledge," constructivism is an empty and vain endeavor, an exercise in futility. This book didn't address any studies on constructivist-taught students' ability to perform better on multiple choice tests. In fact, it talked down to multiple choice testing (of course), ignoring that such tests are the way--whether we like it or not--that students make it through the system. Not preparing them for such tests is a disservice, and contrary to the opinion of the author, there are multiple choice tests that engender inductive and inferential thinking.

Find another book to buy if you want enlightenment. The fact that teachers say they get something out of this book scares me. As an AP Lit teacher, I found this book was not the least bit enlightening.