Applying Constructivism in Neurodiverse Classrooms

Authors

  • Seoyoon Eunie Choi CRG-NJ, Cresskill, New Jersey 07627, USA
  • Sun Lee CRG-NJ, Cresskill, New Jersey 07627, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/ret.v4i4.3876

Abstract

Cognitive development theories differ on how young students can meaningfully process new information and retain that information for future knowledge-building through scaffolding within their zone of proximal development. More traditional theories like the cognitive load theory adhere to the rote memorization approach by categorizing students as passive learners and the teachers as initiators who provide information in a structured, often rigid format, to be stored and retrieved for future application using their working memory. In contrast, the more progressive theories, like constructivism, are premised on the belief that students should proactively initiate their own learning while teachers act more as facilitators. The current trend in government policy under ESSA is to embrace the latter approach in the classroom, which is also more inclusive of all types of students, especially neurodiverse students. Moreover, teachers can utilize the wider range of assistive technology tools to accommodate and support their students’ unique learning styles.

Keywords:

Learning; Constructivism; Cognitive load theory; Zone of proximal development; Assistive technology

References

[1] Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1996). Inclusion, school restructuring, and the remaking of American society. Harvard Educational Review, 66(4), 762- 797.

[2] Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J.J.G. & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 Years Later. Educ Psychol Rev 31, 261-292. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5.

[3] Geary, D. (2002). Principles of evolutionary educational psychology. Learning and Individual Differences. 12. 317-345.

[4] Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective sixth edition. Pearson.

[5] Zimmerman, B. (2002) Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice, 41:2, 64-70. DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2.

[6] Upu, H. (2014). Constructivism versus cognitive load theory: In search for an effective mathematics teaching [submitted]. Proceeding of International Conference On Research, Implementation And Education Of Mathematics And Sciences 2014. http://eprints. uny.ac.id/id/eprint/11559.

[7] Lutz, S., & Huitt, W. (2004). Connecting cognitive development and constructivism: Implications from theory for instruction and assessment. Constructivism in the Human Sciences, 9(1), 67-90.

[8] Esquivel, G. B., & Hodes, T. G. (2003). Creativity, development, and personality. J. Houtz (Ed.), Perspectives on creativity. The educational psychology of creativity (p. 135-165). Hampton Press.

[9] Wertsch, J. V., & Sohmer, R. (1995). Vygotsky on learning and development. Human development, 38(6), 332-337.

[10] Mahan, K. (2020). The comprehending teacher: Scaffolding in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). The Language Learning Journal. DOI:10.1080/09571736.2019.1705879.

[11] Le Cornu, R., & Peters, J. (2005). Towards constructivist classrooms: the role of the reflective teacher. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 6(1).

[12] Steele, M. M. (2005). Teaching students with learning disabilities: Constructivism or behaviorism? Current Issues in Education, 8. https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/ index.php/cieatasu/article/download/1607/650.

[13] Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41:2, 75-86. DOI: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.

[14] Akpan, J., & Beard, L. (2016). Using Constructivist teaching strategies to enhance academic outcomes of students with special needs. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 392-398.

[15] Armstrong, T. (2015, April). The myth of the normal brain: Embracing neurodiversity. Journal of Ethics. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/mythnormal-brain-embracing-neurodiversity/2015-04.

[16] The understood team. (2020, November 19). Four benefits of inclusive classrooms. https://www. understood.org/en/learning-thinking-differences/ treatments-approaches/educational-strategies/4-benefits-of-inclusive-classrooms.

[17] Fosco, W. D., Kofler, M. J., Groves, N. B., Chan, E. S., & Raiker, J. S. (2020). Which ‘working’components of working memory aren’t working in youth with ADHD?. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 48(5), 647-660.Hughes, J. A. (2020).

[18] Does the heterogeneity of autism undermine the neurodiversity paradigm? Bioethics, 00, 1-14. https://doi. org/10.1111/bioe.12780.

[19] Rosen, P. (2020, Oct. 22). Working memory: What it is and how it works.https://www.understood.org/en/ learning-thinking-differences/child-learning-disabilities/executive-functioning-issues/working-memorywhat-it-is-and-how-it-works.

[20] Awh, E., Vogel, E. K., & Oh, S. H. (2006). Interactions between attention and working memory. Neuroscience, 139(1), 201-208.

[21] Swanson, H. & Siegel, L. (2001). Learning disabilities as a working memory deficit. Issues in Education. 7. 1-48.

[22] Forgrave, K. E. (2002). Assistive technology: Empowering students with learning disabilities. The Clearing House, 75(3), 122-126.

[23] Diamond, A. D. E. L. E. (2016). Why improving and assessing executive functions early in life is critical.

[24] Fairfax County Public Schools. (n.d.). https:// www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/special-education-instruction/assistive-technology-services-ats-3.

[25] Phromphithak, C. (2015). The Effect of Using KnowWant-Learn Strategy on Students ‘Achievement and Attitude in Learning Mathematics of 10th Grade Students. The International Conferenceion Language, Education, Humanities & Innovation, 21-22.

[26] LibGuides: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/ Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD/ADD): Home. https://guides.library.illinois.edu/c.php?g=490037.

[27] Brown, E. (2017, June 19). Fifteen assistive technologies for ADHD in HS/college and workplace. https://edielovesmath.net/assistive- technology/.

[28] Rentenbach, B., Prislovsky, L., & Gabriel, R. (2017, May 1). Valuing differences: Neurodiversity in the classroom. https://kappanonline.org/rentenbach-prislovsky-gabriel-valuing-differences-neurodiversity-classroom/.

Downloads

Issue

Vol. 4 , Iss. 4 (November 2021)

Article Type

Articles

License

Copyright and Licensing

The authors shall retain the copyright of their work but allow the Publisher to publish, copy, distribute, and convey the work.

Review of Educational Theory publishes accepted manuscripts under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Authors who submit their papers for publication by Review of Educational Theory agree to have the CC BY-NC 4.0 license applied to their work, and that anyone is allowed to reuse the article or part of it free of charge for non-commercial use. As long as you follow the license terms and original source is properly cited, anyone may copy, redistribute the material in any medium or format, remix, transform, and build upon the material.

License Policy for Reuse of Third-Party Materials

If a manuscript submitted to the journal contains the materials which are held in copyright by a third-party, authors are responsible for obtaining permissions from the copyright holder to reuse or republish any previously published figures, illustrations, charts, tables, photographs, and text excerpts, etc. When submitting a manuscript, official written proof of permission must be provided and clearly stated in the cover letter.
The editorial office of the journal has the right to reject/retract articles that reuse third-party materials without permission.

Journal Policies on Data Sharing

We encourage authors to share articles published in our journal to other data platforms, but only if it is noted that it has been published in this journal.