2.1. Educational Theories of Learning
2.1.5. Social Constructivism Paradigm
Social constructivism is closely associated with many contemporary theories, most notably the developmental theories of Vygotsky, Bruner and Bandura's social cognitive theory (Kim, 2001).
“The social constructivist version of Vygotsky, who in an effort to challenge Piaget's ideas developed a fully cultural psychology stressing the primary role of communication and social life in meaning formation and cognition” (Boudourides, 2003). According to Bruffee (1983) Vygotsky's main relevance to constructivism derives from his theories about language, thought, and their mediation by society. Some of the proponents of social constructivism have taken the criticism levelled against constructivism into their repertoire and elevated knowledge creation from the individual to a group of individuals (Taylor et al., 1997). In offering the distinction between constructivism and social constructivism Salomon and Perkins (1998) argue that these
20
are two conceptions of learning each with its own metaphor. On the one hand, there is the conception of the individual learner, emphasizing the acquisition of knowledge and cognitive skills as transferable commodities. On the other hand, there is the socio-cultural conception of learning as a collective, participatory process of active knowledge construction, emphasizing context, interaction, and situatedness. Social constructivism emphasizes the importance of culture and context in understanding what occurs in society and constructing knowledge based on this understanding (Derry, 1999; McMahon, 1997). Social constructivism shows that learning is not a purely internal process, nor is it a passive shaping of behaviours. Vygotsky favoured a concept of learning as a social construct which is mediated by language via social discourse (McMahon, 1997). The most significant moment in the course of intellectual
development, which gives birth to the purely human forms of practical and abstract intelligence, occurs when speech and practical activity, two previously completely independent lines of development, converge (Rogoff, 1990). A key aspect for this theory is that knowledge is socially constructed and thus contested.
Taylor et al. (1997) illustrate that social constructivism combines both the constructivism and critical theories of learning. They argue that from constructivist theory comes a view of learning as a process of constructing new knowledge within the mind by reflecting on the viability of one’s existing knowledge in light of new experiences, and a socially-mediated process of negotiation of meaning amongst a community of learners. While from critical theory comes a view of an empowered learner as one who seeks to understand others’ understandings through an interest in open communication, and reflects self-critically on the unconscious and shared beliefs and values that shape her routine social practices.
Criticism levelled against social constructivism is the type of learning it supports. Taylor et al.
(1997) argue that while it may be true that social negotiation is a useful approach to achieving consensual understanding of ill-structured subject matter, even in the 'softest' subjects there is often a body of undisputed knowledge.
From the inception of Curriculum 2005 investigative approaches based on social constructivism theory were envisaged as the bases for the new curriculum (Kwanele, 2000). The new South African government embraced social constructivism because the theory accommodates the diversity of languages, cultures, etc. One of the pillars of social constructivism is language and through which people make meaning through negotiate) interact socially, politically,
economically, culturally and spiritually. Social constructivism therefore supports
multilingualism goals of the curriculum 2005 that affords learners the opportunity to develop
21
and value their home languages, cultures and illiteracies and other languages in order to develop a shared understanding of a common South African culture.
2.1.5.1. Assumptions of Social Constructivism Paradigm
Kim (2001) raises specific assumptions about social constructivism, which include reality, knowledge and learning. Social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity where members of a society together invent the properties of the world (Kukla, 2000).
Thus, reality cannot be discovered as it does not exist prior to its social invention.
Constructivists also believe that knowledge is a human product that is socially and culturally constructed (Gredler, 1997). Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in. Learning is, therefore, a social process. It does not take place only internally, nor is it a passive development of behaviours that are shaped by external forces (McMahon, 1997). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning emphasise the cognitive and social activity of learners in co-constructing their knowledge (Taylor et al., 1997). Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities (Fennimore and Tinzmann, 1990).
2.1.5.2. General Perspectives of Social Constructivism on Learning
Social constructivists see as crucial both the context in which learning occurs and the social contexts that learners bring to their learning environment (Kim, 2001). Gredler (1997) raises and discusses four general perspectives that inform learning which are facilitated within the framework of social constructivism. These include the use of cognitive tools, and complex and relevant tasks that include important concepts from different disciplines (idea-based
construction); knowledge, meaning and understanding from different perspectives that emerge during learning activities (emergent construction); and the explored relation between people and their environment (situated cognitive constructivist focus).
2.1.5.3. Social Constructivism and Instructional Models
Learning models based on the social constructivist perspective stress the need for collaboration among learners and with practitioners in the society (Lave and Wenger, 1991; McMahon, 1997). Lave and Wenger (1991) assert that a society’s practical knowledge is situated in relations among practitioners, their practice, and the social organisation and political economy of communities of practice. For this reason, learning should involve such knowledge and practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Gredler, 1997). This has significant implications for the Web
22
as a medium of communication. While it may not be highly interactive in a physical sense, the Web has strong potential for social interactivity. The goal of this type of approach is the achievement of 'virtual communities' of learners on the Internet working in small collaborative groups to achieve a common goal (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995). The design and
development of the two microworld games understudy, Zadarh and yKhozi, were informed by the theories of constructivism and social constructivism.
Traditional Internet communication tools such as e-mail, newsgroups, Internet Relay Chat, and Multiple User Domains offer both the rapid synchronous communication of normal speech as well as asynchronous interaction which may help to promote a more reflective metacongitive approach (McMahon, 1997). With the use of Web browser plug-ins and server software such as Ichat, such facilities are now becoming available in a more cohesive form on the Web.
Examples of learning through communication can be seen in commercial environments such as TopClass (WBT Systems, 1997) which have no actual content but provide the functionality required for real-time communication and collaborative learning.
Within the social constructivist paradigm, the determination of levels of interaction between learners is important, particularly where learning is done through VLEs. Therefore, the
subsequent section tries to interrogated the notions of social capital and social networks, and the position of each learner within the IT led learning community. John and MacArthur (2000) argue that high social capital is crucial for creating successful virtual learning environment.