Constructivism a BC Offshore School: The case of

Maple Leaf Educational System

Introduction

In 1995, Maple Leaf Educational Systems opened its first offshore

school in Dalian, China.

MLES was one of many companies to offer

British Columbia curriculum and a chance for students to receive a

British Columbia certificate of graduation (Dogwood Diploma) in an
offshore environment, not only in China, but around the globe.

China

in particular, has been the largest market for the education

ministrys offshore program, currently comprising 28 of the British
Columbias 37 offshore schools.

MLES is the largest player in this

arena, offering their program in nine different campuses throughout

China, accounting for just under a third of the BC offshore schools
in the country and nearly a quarter of the programs worldwide.
Since around the same time that MLES opened its first doors, there
has been an educational paradigm shift towards constructivist
learning theory.

In short, constructivism is based on the idea that

students build upon what they know to create new knowledge through an
active learning process.

The role of the teacher in a constructivist

setting shifts from the traditional delivery mechanism of knowledge

to a mentor to help the student discover their own learning, making
the process more authentic and meaningful.

While the educational

community in general trumpets the transition towards viewing learners

as not empty vessels waiting to be filled, but rather active
organisms seeking meaning (Driscoll, 2005, p. 387), my experience
over the past four years in MLES has witnessed a reluctance to move
towards this paradigm.

This paper explores the cultural aspects and

systemic reasons why constructivist pedagogy has struggled to make

the leap across the Pacific Ocean and not been adopted at MLES and
argues for the benefits of its inclusion for the Chinese learner.

Barriers to Constructivism: Cultural and Systemic

One of the major selling points of MLES is to have students

taught by Canadian teachers, improve their English and prepare them
for post secondary outside of China. The cultural divide between the
Canadian teachers and Chinese students acts as a hindrance to
constructivist implementation, which emphasizes the social and
cultural context of cognition (Duffy and Cunningham, 1996).

Knowing

your students is critical in constructivist education because of the

underlying assumption that we build on our previous knowledge.

Since

Canadian teachers have different first languages, ideas about family,

politics and values, it adds to the challenge of knowing from where
the Chinese student is coming. As William Cobern states, contextual
constructivism carried to its logical conclusion compels the
investigation of student views within the cultural context which
gives meaning to those views (Cobern, 1991).

There must be an

understanding of the fundamental, culturally based beliefs that both

students and teachers bring to class, and how these beliefs are
supported by culture. Perhaps most importantly, the culture of
Chinese students educational background makes the implementation of
constructivist pedagogy difficult.

The Chinese learner is often stereotyped as one who succeeds at

regurgitating information at exam time.

This stereotype could

perhaps be trace to Confucius, who advocated a philosophy of

education that included dialogue, thinking and reflecting, as well as
memorizing (Rao and Chan, 2009).

Huang (2009) describes the

traditional Chinese classroom as a space where students have been

expected to accept unquestioningly the words of the teacher and the

texts they produce for their students to read. The students role has
been that of passive receiver of ideas (Huang, 2009). While there
have been movements in contemporary Chinese education to incorporate
western pedagogy, most MLES students come to the high school program
after completing primary and middle school years in Chinese schools.
The vast majority of these schools fundamentals are based on the
authority of the teacher, emphasis on grades and tests, individual
learning, standard assessments, and rote learning and memorization.
This traditional style of education is in stark contrast to the
constructivist characteristics of collaboration, individualized
learning, problem based learning, and student-centered environments.
In his study on adapting western pedagogy, Hui Li concluded that
these imported ideas are not congruent with traditional Chinese
culture and thus have encountered resistance (Li, 2012). Perhaps
constructivism has not been implemented at MLES because teachers are
aware of the obstacle of how cultural differences could come into
play, but from what I have witnessed, the reason is more systemic.

The large majority of faculty at MLES are new teachers whose

first jobs are teaching in China.

The lure of teaching Canadian

curriculum, making Canadian salary in a foreign land with a lower

cost of living has been enough to draw teachers from across the
country out of their respective educational programs.
stay between 2-3 years before moving on.

Most teachers

These teachers are freshly

versed in theories of constructivism and the benefits, not old dogs

that we have to teach new tricks to, per se. One issue that limits
MLES teachers constructivist practice is the demand to cover
content, which I believe leads them to regress back to traditional
techniques.

In their study Problems in Developing a Constructivist

Approach to Teaching: One Teacher's Transition from Teacher

Preparation to Teaching, Cook concludes that application of

constructivism is difficult for new teachers as they face a
in

terms

demands

of teaching durable concepts that

of

themselves
arena for

school settings,
are

contested

assessment

dilemma

withstand conflicting

especially when the concepts

and the

of teaching

school settings

provide the

competence (Cook, 2002).

Another factor is the schools willingness to adopt the values

of its host country demanding homogeneity across its faculty. Most
departments, in fact, have identical lessons from block to block, as
to make the system more fair.

New teachers step into existing year

plans and are expected to follow as planned.

This stifles the

creativity and initiative of new teachers to implement the

constructivist pedagogy they recently learned and fall in line with
the existing system.

New teachers are less likely to take risks by

infusing new ideas especially when the old ones are so engrained.
The original leadership of MLES was comprised of retired British
Columbia Principals.

This old-guard provides leadership that

administered over Canadian classrooms that used a largely teacher

centered approach.

Perhaps it is this leadership that has hindered

the adoption of constructivist technologies like moodle to be

embraced by the systems faculty.

Why Constructivism?

In spite of the cultural and systemic barriers MLES teachers are

up against when attempting to implement constructivism to their
classrooms, the benefits can and would be worth the effort.

Over 99%

of the students at MLES are English Language Learners (ELL).

Constructivist techniques such as involving students in the process

of teaching and learning, utilizing collaboration, allowing them to

self-direct and work independently can all be successful methods for
teaching ELL students (Mvududu and Thiel-Burgess, 2012).

In her

dissection of constructivist language learning, Dorit Kaufman found

that research in emergent literacy and narrative development brought
together linguists, psychologists, and cognitive scientists who
incorporated Piagetian and Vygotskian conceptual frameworks and
constructivist notions to underscore the centrality of language and
the role of social and cognitive processes in the construction of
knowledge and the development of literacy (Kaufman, 2004).
Incorporating constructivist tools like podcasting and blogging also
benefit the audio and visual ELL.

Especially for ELLs, these

technologies offer multiple points of access to materials and the

ability to make multiple revisions and that are reusable, which would
have a positive impact on their learning (Kim, 2011). If language is
about communication, social constructivist approaches to teaching
reading have serious merit so that students learn to read, speak and
write as an authentic and meaningful activity rather than as a
classroom exercise (Huang, 2009). While the drill, repeat, test
method may have a nostalgic appeal to MLES students, the curriculum
could use an infusion of constructivist techniques.

In order to bring constructivism into the MLES system and help

bridge the students transition to post secondary studies in the
west, awareness of prior experiences and culture related variables
need to be considered.

The first step is the acknowledgement of the

two main cultural myths underlying the traditional teacher-centered

approach.

First, an objectivist view of the nature of knowledge and

second, an accompanying technical controlling view that focuses on

the curriculum as a product to be transmitted (Fok, 2008).

Taylor

(1996) argued that unless these myths were taken into consideration,

a true constructivist learning environment is not possible. In Chens

(2012) study, When Chinese Learners Meet Constructivist Pedagogy
Online, The findings indicate a strong culture clash between these
students educational dispositions, shaped by their previous learning
experiences in China, and the online pedagogic practices, which were
underpinned by a constructivist approach (Chen, 2012).

The study

concluded that the students problems in acculturating to their

online courses arose at least in part from a clash between their
heritage and host educational cultures (Chen, 2012). Since a goal of
MLES is preparing students to succeed in western post-secondary
institutions, it is important that they adopt constructivist
practices and supporting technologies as to ease the transition for
the students.

ROADMAP:

The following suggestions are offered to MLES as ways to implement

constructivism into its program.

1)

Institute a top/down mandate to include constructivist

principles in unit and lesson plans.

MLES should hold an

administration workshop on constructivism and its importance in

education.

Constructivist principles and use of technology should

be woven into teacher assessment and evaluation.

With new,

malleable teachers continuing to make up the majority of the

faculty, when they begin their careers they are more likely to
fall in line with constructivist pedagogy as opposed to
traditional techniques if directed to do so.

Individual MLES

schools should use professional development to reinforce the

importance of constructivism, building on what teachers already
know from their education programs.

2) Incentivize the process through competition.

an award for Most Constructive Teacher.

At each school have

Teachers will be able

to self nominate themselves through an upload of a video

submission. Each school will submit their top three videos and an
award will be given to Most Constructive Campus.

This bank of

video submissions could be used in professional development or to

share ideas within schools and between campuses. To further
motivate teachers, monetize the awards and offer them as bonuses
to individual teachers and administration teams.

3) Spend professional development on learning Chinese culture,

especially in regards to Chinese traditional education.

As

indicated in this paper, it is critical to know where the students

are coming from to incorporate constructivism.

Possible topics

for professional development sessions: Comparing and contrasting

Chinese and Canadian students, Chinese history for dummies,
Confucius thoughts on Chinese education.

Conclusion:

This paper outlines why constructivist practices have not been

widely adopted at MLES and argues for their implementation.

Cultural

and systemic barriers are uncovered to suggest some of the reason why
the shift to constructivism has been impeded.

Evidence of

constructivist practices with English Learners is offered to validate

constructivist practices with MLES students. Cultural awareness and
acknowledgment of traditional Chinese educational practices are
paramount for successful implementation in the MLES system.
Suggested strategies are offered to make the implementation of
constructivism more successful.

It is critical to legitimacy of MLES

as a British Columbia offshore school to follow the provinces shift

towards the constructivist paradigm (BC Education Plan, 2011).

If

MLES wants to live up to its motto of blending the best of the east
and the west, then it needs to employ constructivist education into
its programs, better serving their students and their futures.

References

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2011). BCs Education

Plan. Retrieved from:
http://personalizedlearningbc.ca/assets/pdf/bc_edu_plan.pdf

Chen, R and Bennett, S. (2012). When Chinese learners meet

constructive pedagogy online. Higher Education (pp. 677-691). Vol 64
(5). Published Online: Springer Science and Business Media.

Cobern, W. (1991). Contextual Constructivism: The Impact of

Culture on the Learning and Teaching of Science. A paper presented at
the at the Annual Theoretical Bases for Science Education Research
Symposium.

Retrieved from:

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED338488.pdf

Cook, L. (2002). Problems in Developing a Constructivist

Approach to Teaching: One Teacher's Transition from Teacher
Preparation to Teaching. The Elementary School Journal (pp. 389413). Vol. 102, (5). Chicago: University of Chicago. Retrieved from:
http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1001&context=coe_dean

Driscoll, M.P. (2005). Constructivism. Psychology of Learning

for Instruction (pp. 384-407). Toronto, Pearson.

Duffy, T. M. & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism:

implications for the design and delivery of instruction. Handbook of
research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170198).
New York: Macmillan.

Fok, A. (2008). Does a Critical Constructivist Learning

Environment Encourage a Deeper Approach to Learning? The AsiaPacific education researcher. (pp 1-10). Vol. 16 (1). Hong Kong:

Huang, Q. (2009). English Reading Base on Social Constructivist

Approach. Asian Social Science (pp. 174-176) Vol. 5 (7).

Hui, L. (2012). Adapting Western Pedagogies for Chinese Literacy

Instruction: Case Studies of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Singapore
Preschools. Early education and development (pp 603-622). Vol 23,
(4). Hong Kong: Lawrence Elbrum Associates.

Kaufman, D. (2004). Constructivist Teaching in Language Learning

and Teaching. Annual Review of Applied Lingustics (pp. 303-319).
Vol. 24. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kim, D. (2011). Implementing Podcasts and Blogs with ESOL

Teacher Candidates' Preparation: Interpretations and Implications.
International forum of teaching and studies (pp. 5-21). Vol. 7 (2).

Mvududu, N and Thiel-Burgess, J. (2012). Constructivism in

Practice: The Case for English Language Learners. International
Journal of Education (pp 108-119). Vol. 4 (3). Las Vegas: Macrothink
Institute.
Rao, N. and Chan, C. (2009). Understanding the Chinese Learner
Today.
Revisiting the Chinese Learner. Changing Contexts, Changing
Education. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups.
Retrieved from: http://www.fe.hku.hk/cerc/Publications/yhk_1_4_1315.pdf

Rao, N and Ng, S. (2008). Mathematics teaching during the early

years in Hong Kong: a reflection of constructivism with Chinese
characteristics? Early Years: An International Research Journal (pp
159-172). Vol. 28 (2). London: Routledge.

10

11