Examination and Comparation of Constructivism

and Humanistic Learning Theories

Name: Siyao Ma
ID: 29049512
Tutor Name: Jahirul Mullick
 1
Siyao Ma

Learning theories provide explanations for learning process and serve as philosophical

foundation guiding teachers’ instructional strategies. Constructivism and humanistic

orientation to learning are drawing more attention nowadays as the focus of education starts to

shift from teacher-led teaching to student-centred classrooms and the philosophy changes from

teaching knowledge to teaching human. These two theories emphasise on different aspects of

learning, but they complement each other addressing the issue of how learning occurs and

suggesting best practices to facilitate learning. This essay will at first examine key ideas of

constructivism and compare two key theories within this paradigm, followed by the discussion

of humanistic theory. The author will at last explain what is learning from a personal

perspective.

Constructivism

Constructivism equates learning with sense-making of the new knowledge based on students’

existing knowledge and understanding (Bednar et al., 1991). Despite the inconsistency of exact

definition, two assumptions have been widely accepted as the core. Firstly, learners are active

and construct knowledge by themselves (Geary, 1995). Simpson (2002) concurs with the

subjectivity of knowledge and considers it as a product of our cognition. Since constructed

knowledge does not necessarily reflect true reality, Hawks (2003) concludes that perception

contains inherent bias. Thus, the knowledge transferred and the knowledge acquired are never

consistent and the difference resides in every learner. Another key assumption is that learning

contexts should be arranged in a way that students could learn by doing and engage actively

with others (Schunk, 2012). This is because learning is situated in contexts (Bredo, 2006).

Experiments prove that students perform better in similar situations where they learn the

knowledge than in a very different room (Smith et al., 1978). This means that providing

students with more hands-on experience and real-life situation could facilitate learning and

meanwhile make the learning more meaningful to students.

 2
Siyao Ma

There are two key theories within this paradigm, which are cognitive constructivism and

social constructivism. Piaget is the key theorist in cognitive constructivism and his learning

theory derives from his idea about structure, assimilation and accommodation, cognitive

conflict and equilibrium. Cognitive conflict causes disequilibrium and to resolve conflict,

learners either assimilate or accommodate to achieve equilibrium again. Assimilation is when

learners perceive new knowledge in their old schema and accommodation is when they

change their schema to perceive new knowledge. During this process, learners make sense of

the new knowledge and learning occurs. Similarly, social constructivism is represented by

Vygotsky who advocates that human development is mainly attributable to social interaction,

cultural and historical factors and personal factors (Scrimsher & Tudge, 2003). The learning

process is influenced by learners’ social environment through cultural objects, language and

social institutions (Schunk, 2012), among which language is the most important tool (Meece,

2002). In addition to emphasising on impact of social interaction on cognitive development,

Vygotsky proposes the idea of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). It is the discrepancy

between learners’ actual capabilities and their potential capabilities with the assistance of

more skilled peers (Vygotsky, 1987). learning becomes possible and scaffolding is most

effective in this area.

It is widely accepted that the main difference between is the extent to which Piaget and

Vygotsky attribute the knowledge construction to the interpersonal relationship (Bredo, 1997,

Woolfolk, 2004). Despite that, prior knowledge and social interaction are of important concern

for both theorists. They both agree that prior knowledge forms the foundation. Piaget’s idea of

schema by the definition itself represents the prior knowledge and experience that learners have

and for Vygotsky, although ZPD has always been equated with scaffolding, Scrimsher and

Tudge (2003) state that what the child brings to the interaction is imbedded in Vygotsky’s

belief. Another similarity is that new knowledge should be constructed within a close distance
 3
Siyao Ma

from the starting point. Even though ZPD is the typical Vygotskian theory, Piaget also

mentions that for optimal learning to occur, the cognitive conflict should be small in order to

trigger disequilibrium (Schunk, 2012). Regarding attitudes towards social interaction,

Vygotsky unquestionably places importance in role of interpersonal relationship in

constructing knowledge, but Piaget (1970) also clearly states that “There is no longer any need

to choose between the primacy of the social or that of the intellect; the collective intellect is

that social equilibrium resulting from the interplay of the operations that enter into all

cooperation”(p.114). In terms of instructional design, both cognitive and social constructivism

agree that understanding students’ cognitive development at first is fundamental and keeping

students active is critical. Apart from that, while teaching, incongruity should be created to

trigger equilibrium and social interaction should be encouraged as well. Drawing from

Vygotsky’s idea, peer collaboration and apprenticeship need to be integrated to create a socially

active environment.

Humanism

Humanistic orientation to learning, as another learning theory discussed in this essay, is

predominantly concerned with human experience in the learning process, viewing learners as

human beings before as learners. Humanistic theorists believe that human beings have a

natural tendency to learn, given a nourishing and encouraging environment (Ozuah, 2005),

because they are motivated by their own interests and needs. The role of teachers is to

facilitate and nurture the interests and they are likely to adopt flexible and individualised

teaching strategies. As Gage and Berliner (1991) put it, there are five principles of humanistic

orientation that direct instructional design. Because learning is inner driven, students will

learn best what they have the aspirations, so teachers need to attend to learners’ needs.

Another teaching goal is to equip students with tools to become self-regulated, so acquiring

learning skills is more important than acquiring knowledge itself. During this learning
 4
Siyao Ma

process, self-evaluation is the only effective way to evaluate a student’s work since they have

diverse needs and interests. At last learners’ feelings are as important as learning facts in the

classrooms. The most salient point, however, would be that students learn best in a non-

threatening environment. These principles reflect humanistic ideas and provide guidance for

teachers regarding classroom implementation.

Humanistic perspectives are influenced by some key theorists, most notably Abraham Maslow

and Carl Roger. Maslow proposes hierarchy of needs, suggesting that people have inner

tendency to satisfy their needs and the higher level of needs will not be attained unless the

needs of lower levels are met. These five needs are physiological, safety, love and belonging,

esteem and self-actualization needs organised in an order from lower to higher (Churchill et

al., 2016). Although critics argue that there is ambiguity about the criteria of whether needs

are met and how to define self-actualisation, this theory provides insight that learners’ lower

needs are to be addressed before effective learning can happen. That being said, teachers should

take into consideration of students’ physical and emotional wellbeing. Rogers, as another

influential theorist, believes learning is about personal development and human have a natural

tendency for growth towards maturity. Practical experience is critical in providing prime

learning experience and freedom and choices are highly valued. It requires teachers to establish

a meaning and nurturing environment. Within this framework, teachers act as facilitators and

learners are expected to gradually develop skills to reflect on their needs and search information

for themselves (Rogers, 1969). The explanation of learners and teachers lead to the belief that

any environment wherein educators adopt humanistic principles to address leaners needs and

desires, motivations and personal values, learning can occur, and students will become self-

regulated and life-long learners.

Different from humanistic perspective of giving due consideration to human needs,

constructivism emphasises on the examination of knowledge construction. However,

 5
Siyao Ma

similarities between these two theories are also evident. Students are placed in the center of the

learning process, either because learners construct new knowledge by themselves or because

learners’ needs are the starting point of teaching. To add to that, learning is innate motivated.

This is the basic belief of humanists and Piaget also made the point that resolving cognitive

conflict to achieve equilibrium is innately programmed in genes. Furthermore, a meaningful

and experimental environment is highly relevant. Learners are more willing to learn since they

believe this will contribute to their personal growth and it is also easier for them to construct

meaning during manipulation of the environment.

Personal perspective

Influenced by various learning theories, I have developed my own learning belief. I consider

learning as building connection. Connections can be formed between old knowledge or

between old and new knowledge. It means that Piaget’s theory is partially reasonable, because

people can initiate new ideas when they link their prior knowledge but discovering new

connections between old knowledge also constitute learning. The theory of neuroplasticity

supports my idea of connection because learning is about building connections with neurons.

Theory of neuroplasticity also sheds light on how people can learn, and the answer is to practice.

With practice, connections between neurons are strengthened and learning is reinforced.

Learning by doing can deliver better learning results than rote learning, as learners find it easy

to make sense of the new knowledge in the context which is meaningful to them. To facilitate

the learning process, more connections with learners’ prior knowledge should be constructed

and if emotional motivation is involved, the memory lasts longer.

In terms of memory, though learning is not solely about retrieving information, memory serves

as a critical part in the learning process. It is because real and meaningful knowledge is the

knowledge that can be retrieved when needed, and this ability implies that learners need to

construct personalised meaning and retain it in the memory until required (Powell and Kalina,
 6
Siyao Ma

2009). Personally, I interpret the memory mentioned above as long-term memory, because only

retrievable knowledge in the long-term memory constitutes real knowledge. In doing so,

teachers need to use efficient instructional design to support this process and enable students

to be conscious of this process and reinforce their memory by themselves.

Above all, my core belief is that everyone has the potentiality to learn. Teachers should nurture

learners’ curiosity and encourage them to generate questions by themselves to start the inquiry

process. Learners’ interests should be situated in the centre of the process, but meanwhile

interests can be fostered given the appropriate scaffolding. Teachers perform as facilitators and

the locus of control in the learning process decreases when students’ cognitive sophistication

increases. Scaffolding should be in within ZPD of each student so more effective learning can

happen. During guided learning, equipping learners with tools to be self-regulated will be the

aim. Learners will start to reflect on their own learning process and discover the best suitable

learning strategies for themselves. As a result, institutional-situated learners can become life-

long learners.

Conclusion

This essay has examined constructivism and compared the theories of Vygotsky and Piaget,

emphasising that both theories accept the impact of prior knowledge and social interaction on

knowledge construction in spite of the established differences. The author then discussed the

humanistic orientation to learning and compared humanism with constructivism. At last a

personal perspective of learning was proposed. Learning theories are not contradictory to each

other, rather they complement each other and provide important guidance to teachers on

instructional design. Above all, teaching is about helping learners fulfil their potential and

become self-regulated in the long term.

 7
Siyao Ma

Reference

*Bednar. A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., & Perry. J. D. (1991). Theory into practice:
How do we link? In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and
future (pp. 100-112). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unilimited

*Bredo, E. (2006). Conceptual confusion and educational psychology. In P. A. Alexander &

P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 43–57). Abingdon:
Routledge.

Churchill, R., Godinho, S., Johnson, N. F., Keddie, A., Letts, W., Lowe, K., … Vick, M.
(2016). Teaching: Making a difference. (3rd ed.). Milton, QLD: John Wiley & Sons
Australia.

*Gage, N. L., & Berliner, D. C. (1991). Educational psychology (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.

*Geary, D. C. (1995). Reflections of evolution and culture in children’s cognition: Implications

for mathematical development and instruction. American Psychologist, 50(1), 24–37.
doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.50.1.24

*Hawkes, T. (2003). Structuralism and Semiotics (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

*Meece, J. L. (2002). Child and adolescent development for educators (2nd ed.). Boston, MA:
McGraw-Hill College.

*Ozuah, P. O. (2005). First, there was pedagogy and then came andragogy. The Einstein
Journal of Biology and Medicine 21(2), 83-87. doi: 10.23861/EJBM20052190

Piaget. J. (1970). Structuralism. New York: Basic Books.

*Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools
for an effective classroom. Education 130(2), 241-250. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.
gov/?id=EJ871658

Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become. Ohio: Charles
E Merrill Company.

*Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.

*Scrimsher, S., & Tudge, J. (2003). The teaching/learning relationship in the first year school:
Some revolutionary implications of Vygotskya’s theory. Early Education and
Development 14(3), 293-312. doi: 10.1207/s15566935eed1403_3

*Simpson, T. L. (2002). Dare I oppose constructivist theory? The Educational Forum, 66(4),
347–354. doi: 10.1080/00131720208984854
 8
Siyao Ma

*Smith, S. M., Glenberg, A., & Bjork, R. A. (1978). Environmental context and human
memory. Memory & Cognition 6(4), 342–353. Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/content
/pdf/10.3758/BF03197465.pdf

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1: Problems of general

psychology, including the volume thinking and speech. New York: Plenum Press.

Woolfolk, A. (2004). Educational psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.