A Constructivist Classroom
Constructivism as cornerstone at Aurora
It is not surprising that many people express confusion when trying to choose the learning environment that is right for their children. There is great disparity of thought and practice among educators who all sincerely believe that what they are doing is best for children. It can be very confusing. Generally there are two distinct schools of thought about the purpose of schools. On one hand there is "traditional" education represented by B. F. Skinner and more recently by the likes of E. D Hirsch, and his promotion of "Core Knowledge." As with many parents and educators, Hirsch values the acquisition of a discrete set of skills and facts. Students are drilled, tested and declared competent and "culturally literate" when they can regurgitate that which they have been fed. Most American schools are structured to promote conformity to a prescription that will prepare students to enter the workforce. The method for inculcating this core knowledge usually involves a complicated system of rewards and punishments beginning with the basics of classroom exercises and management strategies and culminating in high-stakes tests designed to measure the "success" of each student against his or her peers: The Bell-Shaped Curve of winners and losers.
An opposing view has been championed by a long list of educators from Socrates to Descartes and in the previous century by perhaps America's most famous educational philosopher, John Dewey. All expressed the promotion of introspection, understanding and active participation in community life as education's primary goal. Recently, researchers like Howard Gardner, with his theory of Multiple Intelligences has lent strong support to the Constructivist model of learning that sees the student-centered approach in designing and directing instruction to be the key to effective and useful learning. Gardner writes:
In a constructivist classroom students continually try out ideas and practices for themselves and see where they work and where they prove inadequate. The models that an individual constructs in his or her mind are crucial to understanding or non-understanding.
Aurora 's teaching strategies and core understandings of how children learn are based on the simple fact that learners control their learning. Knowledge does not get poured in from the outside; it must be constructed from within. The truth about the marvelous and sometimes mysterious human brain is that it is extremely well designed and evolved to make order out of chaos. To complicate matters, each individual's brain is unique in its ways and timelines for making sense out of the world.
The constructivist teacher knows that knowledge and understanding are acquired through active exploration. Instead of just listening, reading, and completing one-size-fits-all exercises, students in constructivist classrooms investigate, discuss, and question. Students are encouraged to follow their interests. Curriculum is designed around exploring the big ideas, not the small bits of information. The hungry young mind is always asking, What is the overall purpose? How does this fit in to my experience? How can I use this? The stimulating, student-centered constructivist classroom is based on an understanding of the natural learning process.
Teaching and learning are very complicated, often frustratingly paradoxical and never simple. Designing and orchestrating the complexities of a rich, constructivist environment is a huge task that demands creative, insightful and well-trained professionals.
Each Aurora classroom has two teachers who understand the constructivist model and are encouraged to be independent and creative in responding to the needs of their independent and unique learners. In any classroom you will see small groups of students engaged in any number of active, social activities designed to encourage exploration, discussion, and ultimately thinking. Our attention to the interests and stimulation of the whole child continues beyond the classroom as we recognize the critical nature that art and music, the library and movement play in stimulating curiosity and self-expression.
The student-centered, constructivist approach is everywhere in the Aurora experience. Seemingly every day there are any number of multifaceted projects under construction in one or more classrooms: hatching butterflies, gardening, building science experiments, integrating art, science and writing across classrooms, working in teams and as families to find ways of self expression and appreciation for others. Anyone who has seen an Aurora classroom musical has witnessed an elegant fusion of skill building, individual and group creative expression, and social and emotional development.
As important as these highly visible projects are to developing confident and successful learners, the countless subtle and singular ways in which the essence of constructivism is applied during the quiet interactions between student and teacher illustrates the gulf between educational styles. The focus is far less on the answer and more on the thinking behind it. A teacher can spend most of her day teaching at the board while students strain to follow along or she can design a system that allows one-on-one opportunities as the norm. Perhaps the best illustration is in the simple interaction when a student asks her teacher for the answer. In a system that would have students collecting as many answers as possible it is most efficient for the teacher to simply say, "twenty-four" or "Sacramento" and move on with the lesson. It's quick and efficient. In an Aurora classroom, more often than not, the teacher's answer will be, "What do you think?" It takes more time and usually leads to more questions. It also tells the student that she can be the one in charge of her learning. The teacher is showing support and encouraging independence; modeling how learners take charge of their own learning.
Constructivism in the Aurora experience is manifest in complex and dramatic projects as well as in countless subtle interactions in which a teacher supports each child's next steps-encouraging risks with an understanding that it is the journey and not the destination wherein lies the learning.
Excerpted from an article written by Bob Whitlow, educator and retired Head of Aurora School.
Related articles
Traditional vs. Progressive/Constructivist Classrooms 
A chart summarizing the differences.
Progressive vs Traditional: Reframing an old debate by James H Nehring, published in "Education Week" February 2006.