A PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS

of
Constructivism

The Road Towards Construction of the Philippine Education
from a Constructivists Point of View


Piaget (1977) asserts that learning occurs by an active construction of meaning, rather than
by passive recipience. He explains that when we, as learners, encounter an experience or a situation
that conflicts with our current way of thinking, a state of disequilibrium or imbalance is created. We
must then alter our thinking to restore equilibrium or balance. To do this, we make sense of the
new information by associating it with what we already know, that is, by attempting to assimilate it
into our existing knowledge. When we are unable to do this, we accommodate the new information
to our old way of thinking by restructuring our present knowledge to a higher level of thinking.

One of the common threads of constructivism that runs across all these definitions is the
idea that development of understanding requires the learners actively engage in meaning-making.
In contrast to behaviorism, constructivists argue that "knowledge is not passively received but built
up by the cognizing subject" (Von Glasersfeld, 1995). Thus, constructivists shift the focus from
knowledge as a product to knowing as a process.

In these days of quick fixes making everything a push-button routine and being able to
access immediately the readily available information from the internet at the comforts of ones
home or in any place empowered with a reliable Wi-Fi connection, thus making life so past-faced
that virtues of patience and industry have become so selectively slim. Hence, learning becomes an
easy come, easy go among our students.

So, where have all those learnings gone? Where have all those exhaustive efforts of our
dedicated teachers gone? Are they eternally gone with the wind? Or are temporarily situated at the
hindsight of our learners mind?

Educational curricula and teaching methods are continually changing and adapting
according to the needs of the students or the leaners as a whole. One component of the current
redevelopment of all subject area curricula is the change in focus of instruction from the
transmission curriculum to a transactional curriculum. In a traditional curriculum, a teacher
transmits information to students who passively listen and merely acquire facts. In a transactional
curriculum, students are actively involved in their learning to reach new understandings.

Constructivist teaching fosters critical thinking and creates active and motivated learners.
Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde (1993) tell us that learning in all subject areas involves inventing and
constructing new ideas. They suggest that constructivist theory be incorporated into the
curriculum, and advocate that teachers create environments in which children can construct their
own understandings . Twomey Fosnot (1989) recommends that a constructivist approach be used
to create learners who are autonomous, inquisitive thinkers who question, investigate, and reason.
A constructivist approach frees teachers to make decisions that will enhance and enrich students'
development" in these areas. This demonstrates that constructivism is evident in current
educational change.
Time and again, the quality of education has always been in question on whether it really
does produce quality graduates empowered with the expected competencies, knowledge, skills,
attitudes, and values that could be at par with the global arena.
Undeniably, the quality of education, especially the Philippine basic education covering the
elementary and secondary education have become poor as reflected in their low performance
scores in the achievement tests administered by the Dep Ed. One proof of this is established by the
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) of 2003 and 2008 which says that:
In 2003 when a standardized exam on Science was given to Grade IV students who were chosen as
respondents from 25 countries, the Philippines ranked 23
rd
with a score of 332 as against 489 as
the international average, whereas in Mathematics we still ranked 23
rd
among the 25 participating
countries with a score of 358, as against the international average of 495. Among second year high
school students chosen as respondents, Science as a subject taken ranked 43
rd
among 46
participating countries with a score of 377 as against the international average of 473. As regards,
the Mathematics, we ranked 34
th
among the 38 countries that participated with a score of 378 as
against the international average of 466. And in 2008 for advanced mathematics, we ranked 10
th

among 10 participating countries with a score of 355 as against the international average of 500.
What then all these data show and impart to us? Is the deteriorating performance level of
Filipino students solidarily attributable to the learners themselves? Is it a teacher factor since the
techniques or strategies they make use of are no longer effective and efficient? Or is it the
contributory responsibility of the Philippine education system that needs to be reformed and
should center for the acquisition of essential competencies of graduates?
Surely, it is least imputable on the part of the students. But we are not here to pinpoint who
the most guilty or the less guilty is, with respect to the current level of performance and/or
achievement of students. What we are certain about is that the abovementioned data give us a very
alarming situation, pose an urgent call for reforms in the methods of teachings or approaches we
employ as teachers and give some recommendatory actions to the implementers of the education
system or program of the Department of Education.
A constructivist school of thought may be an initiatory step for reforms to take place in
Philippine educational system. A constructivist teacher and a constructivist classroom exhibit a
number of discernable qualities markedly different from a traditional or direct instruction
classroom. A constructivist teacher is able to flexibly and creatively incorporate ongoing
experiences in the classroom into the negotiation and construction of lessons with small groups and
individuals. The environment is democratic, the activities are interactive and student-centered, and
the students are empowered by a teacher who functions as a facilitator or consultant.
Constructivist classrooms are so structured that learners are immersed in experiences
within which they may engage in meaning-making inquiry, action, imagination, invention,
interaction, hypothesizing and personal reflection. Teachers need to recognize how people use their
own experiences, prior knowledge and perceptions, as well as their physical and interpersonal
environments to construct knowledge and meaning. The goal is to produce a democratic classroom
environment that provides meaningful learning experiences for autonomous learners.
This educational philosophy presents an alternative view of what is regarded as knowledge,
suggesting that there may be many ways of interpreting or understanding the world. No longer is
the teacher is seen as an expert, who knows the answers to the questions she or he has constructed,
while the students are asked to identify their teacher's constructions rather than to construct their
own meanings. In a constructivist classroom, students are encouraged to use prior experiences to
help them form and reform interpretations. This may be illustrated by reference to a personal
response approach to literature, a constructivist strategy first articulated by Rosenblatt (1938).
Rosenblatt (1978) argues for a personal and constructive response to literature whereby students'
own experiences and perceptions are brought to the reading task so that in transacting with that
text, the realities and interpretations which the students construct are their own.
There are three (3) essential types of readiness which are needed in order for
constructivism to be successfully implemented: 1) teacher readiness, 2) curricular readiness, 3)
societal readiness as reported by Elkind (2004). He indicates that the absence or failure of any
readiness renders the constructivist educational reform unsuccessful in its aim to effect change in
the students. As regards the relationship of teacher readiness and constructivism, problems may
arise when the teachers do not know how to incorporate constructivist theory into teaching.
Teachers may have difficulty in translating activities into learning objectives. Curriculum is often
test-driven and a gap exists between what is being taught in universities and what teachers need to
know. With respect to curricular readiness, a constructivist approach requires a thorough
understanding of the curriculum to be taught of which content must match its developmental level.
With regard to societal readiness, educational policy makers and society in general have not
accepted and have difficulty adopting constructivism. The no child left behind policy of the
conventional education system is incompatible with constructivist theory.
But no matter how negative the surrounding circumstances may be, we must once and for
all accentuate the positive and embrace all the possible. As long as the search and efforts of seeking
for knowledge, truth and wisdom never cease to exist in the hearts and minds of passionate
educators, there would be a lot of possibilities and avenues for improvement in the educational
practices in our country. Seemingly, some questions about the way professional developments are
carried out, have gradually been delivered and a recent solution of decongesting the educational
system is now in full implementation through the K to 12 program. This new basic education
curriculum emphasizes a holistic and promotes some constructivist approaches, and the
implementation of the same necessitates that teachers make significant changes in the way they
teach and effect change in their students. Furthermore, in profound study and understanding of the
constructivist philosophy, teachers, administrators and others involved in implementing the new
approach need to understand the kinds of changes teachers need to undertake as they make the
transition from more traditionalist forms of instruction to constructivist strategies as well as how
they can make these changes. Generally speaking, professional and curriculum development is an
evolving, personal developmental process that in itself is constructivist. This process can be greatly
assisted by a supportive collegial and administrative medium that allows teachers to change their
own personal constructs about teaching.