# data[].attributes.body
Starting in the 1920’s, the philosophers known as the Vienna Circle started questioning the history of philosophy. They believed prior philosophy was obscure because it focused on speculation rather than evidence and support. They believed “that scientific knowledge is the only kind of factual knowledge and that all traditional metaphysical doctrines are to be rejected as meaningless” (Duignan, 2015). This specific group focused on emperisism. The Vienna Circle began to push the importance of verifiability. They wanted to move philosophy in a direction that required evidence and structure.  There are two types of statements that are said to be true according to the Empirical criteria of meaning established by the Vienna Circle. Analytic statements are true by definition and synthetic statements are true by experience (Tipton, 2012). Philosophical statements must have the ability to be verified for it to be recognized as true. “A statement is meaningful only if it is either purely formal (essentially, mathematics and logic) or capable of empirical verification (Mastin, 2008). If a statement could not be verified, for example religion or ethics, the statement would be considered false in terms of Logical Positivisms.

# data[].attributes.body
They believed “that scientific knowledge is the only kind of factual knowledge and that all traditional metaphysical doctrines are to be rejected as meaningless” (Duignan, 2015).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Logical positivism: Logical positivism, a philosophical movement that arose in Vienna in the 1920s and was characterized by the view that scientific knowledge is the only kind of factual knowledge and that all traditional metaphysical doctrines are to be rejected as meaningless. A brief treatment of logical positivism

# data[].attributes.body
“A statement is meaningful only if it is either purely formal (essentially, mathematics and logic) or capable of empirical verification (Mastin, 2008). If a statement could not be verified, for example religion or ethics, the statement would be considered false in terms of Logical Positivisms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Logical Positivism - By Branch / Doctrine - The Basics of Philosophy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Philosophy: Epistemology > Logical Positivism

# data[].attributes.body
The Vienna Circle wanted to move philosophy in a direction that required evidence and structure. This means a statement can only be true if it can be empirically verified in principal. There are two types of statements that are said to be true according to the Empirical criteria of meaning established by the Vienna Circle. Analytic statements are true by definition and synthetic statements are true by experience (Tipton, 2012).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Lane G. Tipton, Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary, describes logical positivism, a type of analytic philosophy incorporating mathematical and logico-linguistic constructs and deductions of epistemology.

# data[].attributes.body
Post-Positivism is a theoretical position that critiques and disagrees with Logical Positivism. This is driven by ontological beliefs and focuses on the nature of philosophy (Guba & Lincoln, 1995). Post-positivists believe that concepts, experience, knowledge and morals of the philosopher can influence what is observed during discovery. This paradigm focuses on the individual’s reality and that “the subjective is a valid form of knowledge (not necessarily more valid than the objective, but of equal validity), and that all people are capable of naming their own world and constructing knowledge…” (Ryan, 2006).  Post-positivists recognize the effects of biases and try to pursue research as objectively as possible. They believe that human knowledge is not based on the tangible and supported evidence, but rather on human inferences. “The post-positivist believes that the goal of scienceis to hold steadfastly to the goal of getting it right about reality, even though we can never achieve that goal” (Trochim, 2006). This is an impossible goal because of human mistakes and natural flaws. Therefore, Post-Positivism is not a form of belief, however, it preserves the indication of the objective truth.

# data[].attributes.body
This paradigm focuses on the individual’s reality and that “the subjective is a valid form of knowledge (not necessarily more valid than the objective, but of equal validity), and that all people are capable of naming their own world and constructing knowledge…” (Ryan, 2006).

# data[].attributes.body
Post-positivists recognize the effects of biases and pursue research objectively. They believe that human knowledge is not based on the tangible and supported evidence, but rather on human inferences. “The post-positivist believes that the goal of science is to hold steadfastly to the goal of getting it right about reality, even though we can never achieve that goal” (Trochim, 2006)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OK, I am exaggerating the positivist position (although you may be amazed at how close to this some of them actually came) in order to make a point. Things have changed in our views of science since the middle part of the 20th century.

# data[].attributes.body
This is driven by ontological beliefs and focuses on the nature of philosophy (Guba & Lincoln, 1995). Post-positivists believe that concepts, experience, knowledge and morals of the philosopher can influence what is observed during discovery.

# data[].attributes.body
Constructivism is the process of generating knowledge from prior life experiences and situations. According to Sheila Scott, knowledge and beliefs are formed within the learner and learning is considered a social activity enhanced by sharing inquiry” (2006). The knowledge an individual gains is from the interpretation of their experiences. Individuals will generate knowledge as they experience different situations and interpret them separately. Individuals are actively pursuing a making meaning for all life experiences. Constructivist are able to construct their own understanding of the world, “through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. When we encounter something new, we have to reconcile it with our previous ideas and experience, maybe changing what we believe, or maybe discarding the new information as irrelevant” (Concepts to Classroom, 2004).  Because knowledge is built on an individual’s reality and personal experiences, their knowledge might not accurately represent true reality. “People actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality” (David, 2015). Knowledge can be changed if new information conflicts with prior information. An individual’s knowledge should be verified against knowledge of others to check from commonalities.

# data[].attributes.body
Because knowledge is built on an individual’s reality and personal experiences, their knowledge might not accurately represent true reality. “People actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality” (David, 2015).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Contributors

Key Concepts

A reaction to didactic approaches such as behaviorism and programmed instruction, constructivism states that learning is an active, contextualized process of constructing knowledge rather than acquiring it. Knowledge is constructed based on personal experiences and hypotheses of the environment. Learners continuously test these hypotheses through social negotiation. Each person has a different interpretation and construction of knowledge process. The learner is not a blank slate (tabula rasa) but brings past experiences and cultural factors to a situation[3][4].

NOTE: A common misunderstanding regarding constructivism is that instructors should never tell students anything directly but, instead, should always allow them to construct knowledge for themselves. This is actually confusing a theory of pedagogy (teaching) with a theory of knowing. Constructivism assumes that all knowledge is constructed from the learner's previous knowledge, regardless of how one is taught. Thus, even listening to a lecture involves active attempts to construct new knowledge.

Vygotsky's social development theory is one of the foundations for constructivism.

Additional Resources and References

Resources

References

1. Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.

2. Piaget, J. (2013). The construction of reality in the child (Vol. 82). Routledge.

3. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective.Performance improvement quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.

4. Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm Shifts in Designed Instruction: From Behaviorism to Cognitivism to Constructivism. Educational technology, 33(5), 12-19.

[cite]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Key Concepts A reaction to didactic approaches such as behaviorism and programmed instruction, constructivism states that learning is an active, contextualized process of constructing knowledge rather than acquiring it. Knowledge is constructed based on personal experiences and hypotheses of the environment. Learners continuously test these hypotheses through social negotiation.

# data[].attributes.body
Constructivist are able to construct their own understanding of the world, “through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. When we encounter something new, we have to reconcile it with our previous ideas and experience, maybe changing what we believe, or maybe discarding the new information as irrelevant” (Concepts to Classroom, 2004).  Because knowledge is built on an individual’s reality and personal experiences, their knowledge might not accurately represent true reality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Welcome to Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Start with the Explanation section to gain a good understanding of the CONCEPT of constructivism. Then go on to Demonstration, where we move from CONCEPT TO CLASSROOM!

What is constructivism?
How does this theory differ from traditional ideas about teaching and learning?
What does constructivism have to do with my classroom?
Expert interview
What is the history of constructivism, and how has it changed over time?
What are some critical perspectives?
What are the benefits of constructivism?

What is constructivism?
Constructivism is basically a theory -- based on observation and scientific study -- about how people learn. It says that people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. When we encounter something new, we have to reconcile it with our previous ideas and experience, maybe changing what we believe, or maybe discarding the new information as irrelevant. In any case, we are active creators of our own knowledge. To do this, we must ask questions, explore, and assess what we know.

In the classroom, the constructivist view of learning can point towards a number of different teaching practices. In the most general sense, it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques (experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. The teacher makes sure she understands the students' preexisting conceptions, and guides the activity to address them and then build on them.

Constructivist teachers encourage students to constantly assess how the activity is helping them gain understanding. By questioning themselves and their strategies, students in the constructivist classroom ideally become "expert learners." This gives them ever-broadening tools to keep learning. With a well-planned classroom environment, the students learn HOW TO LEARN.

You might look at it as a spiral. When they continuously reflect on their experiences, students find their ideas gaining in complexity and power, and they develop increasingly strong abilities to integrate new information. One of the teacher's main roles becomes to encourage this learning and reflection process.

For example: Groups of students in a science class are discussing a problem in physics. Though the teacher knows the "answer" to the problem, she focuses on helping students restate their questions in useful ways. She prompts each student to reflect on and examine his or her current knowledge. When one of the students comes up with the relevant concept, the teacher seizes upon it, and indicates to the group that this might be a fruitful avenue for them to explore. They design and perform relevant experiments. Afterward, the students and teacher talk about what they have learned, and how their observations and experiments helped (or did not help) them to better understand the concept.

Contrary to criticisms by some (conservative/traditional) educators, constructivism does not dismiss the active role of the teacher or the value of expert knowledge. Constructivism modifies that role, so that teachers help students to construct knowledge rather than to reproduce a series of facts. The constructivist teacher provides tools such as problem-solving and inquiry-based learning activities with which students formulate and test their ideas, draw conclusions and inferences, and pool and convey their knowledge in a collaborative learning environment. Constructivism transforms the student from a passive recipient of information to an active participant in the learning process. Always guided by the teacher, students construct their knowledge actively rather than just mechanically ingesting knowledge from the teacher or the textbook.

Constructivism is also often misconstrued as a learning theory that compels students to "reinvent the wheel." In fact, constructivism taps into and triggers the student's innate curiosity about the world and how things work. Students do not reinvent the wheel but, rather, attempt to understand how it turns, how it functions. They become engaged by applying their existing knowledge and real-world experience, learning to hypothesize, testing their theories, and ultimately drawing conclusions from their findings.

The best way for you to really understand what constructivism is and what it means in your classroom is by seeing examples of it at work, speaking with others about it, and trying it yourself. As you progress through each segment of this workshop, keep in mind questions or ideas to share with your colleagues.

| | | |

| | | |

Thirteen | Thirteen Ed Online | thirteencelebration.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Start with the Explanation section to gain a good understanding of the CONCEPT of constructivism. Then go on to Demonstration, where we move from CONCEPT TO CLASSROOM! What is constructivism? How does this theory differ from traditional ideas about teaching and learning?

# data[].attributes.body
According to Sheila Scott, knowledge and beliefs are formed within the learner and learning is considered a social activity enhanced by sharing inquiry” (2006). The knowledge an individual gains is from the interpretation of their experiences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

# data[].attributes.body
The Scientific Management Theory was first established by Fredrick Taylor. He wanted to create a work environment that helped the productivity of businesses. He wanted to make work more standardized and efficient by studying the employees work processes. He was able to apply basic scientific research to the work environment. He strived to move away from the individual way of accomplishing a task and standardize performance. To do this, he encouraged the division of labor. This divided the work into simple steps and one person would accomplish either one or two steps. “Breaking down work into simple repetitive tasks eliminates unnecessary motion and limits the handling of different tools and parts” (Sampaolo, 2017). He also encouraged hierarchy because he thought it was important to have the managers create, design, and enforce the design processes. “Scientific management required managers to walk around with stop watches and note pads carrying out time-and-motion studies on workers in different departments” (The Economist Newspaper, 2017).  He also pushed selection and training of “first-class employees” (Taylor, 1911). He believed the hardest workers should be paid more than those who did not perform as quickly and accurately. Taylor believed in the idea of “a fair a day’s pay for a fair of day’s work” because all workers were driven by money (Taylor, 1911). He used the Time and Motion method. Time focused on performing a task in the least amount of time and motion focused on performing a task in the fewest amount of steps.

# data[].attributes.body
He also encouraged hierarchy because he thought it was important to have the managers create, design, and enforce the design processes. “Scientific management required managers to walk around with stop watches and note pads carrying out time-and-motion studies on workers in different departments” (The Economist Newspaper, 2017).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Scientific management was the first big management idea to reach a mass audience. It swept through corporate America in the early years of the 20th century, and much management thinking since has been either a reaction to it or a development of it.

The idea was first propounded by Frederick Winslow Taylor (see article), partly in response to a motivational problem, which at the time was called "soldiering"-the attempt among workers to do the least amount of work in the longest amount of time. To counter this, Taylor proposed that managers should scientifically measure productivity and set high targets for workers to achieve. This was in contrast to the alternative method, known as initiative and incentive, in which workers were rewarded with higher wages or promotion. Taylor described this method as "poisonous".

Scientific management required managers to walk around with stop watches and note pads carrying out time-and-motion studies on workers in different departments. It led to the piece-rate system in which workers were paid for their output, not for their time. Taylor's first publication, which came out in 1895, was called "A Piece-Rate System".

He believed that "the principal object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity of each employee". The interests of management, workers and owners were, he maintained, intertwined. He wanted to remove "all possible brain work" from the shop floor, handing all action, as far as possible, over to machines. "In the past, the man has been first; in the future the machine must be first," he was fond of saying. He ignited a debate about man versus machine that continued far into the 20th century.

The famous book in which he enunciated his theories, "The Principles of Scientific Management", had a strong impact on subsequent management thinking. It influenced such people as Frank and Lillian Gilbreth (see article), American time-and-motion experts; it influenced industrial psychologists, many of whom saw it as an insult to the human spirit and set out to show that allowing free rein to human initiative produced superior results; and it influenced industrialists like the Michelin brothers (of tyre fame).

At the core of scientific management lie four principles:

* Replace rule-of-thumb methods of doing work with ones based on scientific study of the tasks to be carried out.

* Select and train individuals for specific tasks.

* Give individuals clear instructions on what they have to do, then supervise them while they do it.

* Divide work between managers and workers, so that the managers plan "scientifically" what is to be done, and the workers then do it.

Peter Drucker (see article) once wrote that Taylor was "the first man in history who did not take work for granted, but looked at it and studied it. His approach to work is still the basic foundation". The trade union movement, however, always hated it. A union officer once said: "No tyrant or slave driver in the ecstasy of his most delirious dream ever sought to place upon abject slaves a condition more repugnant."

There is little space for Taylor's ideas in today's world of freewheeling teamwork. But the writings of people such as Michael Porter (see article) and Michael Hammer, with their emphasis on breaking business down into measurable (and controllable) activities, hold more than a faint echo of Taylor's ideas.
Further reading
Gilbreth, F.B., "Primer of Scientific Management", D. Van Nostrand, 1912

Taylor, F.W., "Two Papers on Scientific Management: A Piece-rate System and Notes on Belting", George Routledge, 1919

Taylor, F.W., "The Principles of Scientific Management", Harper and Brothers, 1911; reprint, Hive Publishing Company, 1986

Urwick, L. and Brech, E.F.L., "The Making of Scientific Management", Management Publications Trust, 1945-6; reprint, 1965
More management ideas
This article is adapted from "The Economist Guide to Management Ideas and Gurus", by Tim Hindle (Profile Books; 322 pages; £20). The guide has the low-down on over 100 of the most influential business-management ideas and more than 50 of the world's most influential management thinkers. To buy this book, please visit our online shop.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientific management was the first big management idea to reach a mass audience. It swept through corporate America in the early years of the 20th century, and much management thinking since has been either a reaction to it or a development of it.

# data[].attributes.body
He wanted to make work more standardized and efficient by studying the employees work processes. He was able to apply basic scientific research to the work environment. He strived to move away from the individual way of accomplishing a task and standardize performance.

# data[].attributes.body
To standardize performance, he encouraged the division of labor. This divided the work into simple steps and one person would accomplish either one or two steps. “Breaking down work into simple repetitive tasks eliminates unnecessary motion and limits the handling of different tools and parts” (Sampaolo, 2017).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Division of labour , the separation of a work process into a number of tasks, with each task performed by a separate person or group of persons. It is most often applied to systems of mass production and is one of the basic organizing principles of the assembly line . Breaking down work into simple repetitive tasks eliminates unnecessary motion and limits the handling of different tools and parts. The consequent reduction in production time and the ability to replace craftsmen with lower-paid unskilled workers result in lower production costs and a less expensive final product. Contrary to popular belief, however, division of labour does not necessarily lead to a decrease in skills-known as proletarianization-among the working population. The Scottish economist Adam Smith saw this splitting of tasks as a key to economic progress by providing a cheaper and more efficient means of producing goods.

The French scholar Émile Durkheim first used the phrase division of labour in a sociological sense in his discussion of social evolution. Rather than viewing division of labour as a consequence of a desire for material abundance, Durkheim stated that specialization arose from changes in social structure caused by an assumed natural increase in the size and density of population and a corresponding increase in competition for survival. Division of labour functioned to keep societies from breaking apart under these conditions.

Organization of work may have begun before the evolution of Homo sapiens. Along with tools, a more complex brain structure, and linguistic communication, the division of labour (job specialization) may have been responsible for starting the human conquest of nature and differentiating human beings from other animal species.
READ MORE
The intensive specialization in industrial societies-the refinement and simplification of tasks (especially associated with a machine technology) so that a worker often produces only a small part of a particular commodity-is not usually found in nonindustrialized societies. There is rarely a division of labour within an industry in nonliterate communities, except perhaps for the production of larger goods (such as houses or canoes); in these cases the division is often a temporary one, and each worker is competent to perform other phases of the task. There may be some specialization in types of products (e.g., one worker may produce pottery for religious uses; another, pottery for ordinary uses), but each worker usually performs all steps of the process.

A division of labour based on sex appears to be universal, but the form that this takes varies widely across cultures. Divisions on the basis of age, clan affiliation, hereditary position, or guild membership, as well as regional and craft specialization, are also found.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Division of labour , the separation of a work process into a number of tasks, with each task performed by a separate person or group of persons. It is most often applied to systems of mass production and is one of the basic organizing principles of the assembly line .