WORK A constructivist approach to concept attainment

Alan King horn

A teaching strategy for concept attainment based upon a constructivist model is described and evaluated. The constructivist model is outlined, which suggests that students must construct their own knowledge, using their existing knowledge to do so. Transmission methods of teaching run the risk of concepts being altered to fit students’ existing conceptions. A constructivist strategy for concept learning is exemplified drawing on the transcript of an experimental session conducted with a peer group of student teachers studying for the Certificate in Education.

BACKGROUND

Research has shown that students hold a broad range of different ideas. following teaching, which vary from the generally accepted concepts which are being taught (Driver & Erickson 1983; McDermot 1984; Helm & Novak 1983; Driver et al 1985; Osborne & Freyberg 1985). These ideas, which may be thought of as ‘wrong answers’ are not always random but tend to show a common- ality between different students and some con- sistency for the individual student. Hewson and Hewson (1989) refer to these ‘wrong answers’ as ‘alternative conceptions’.

In other words, I can never be sure that my concept of, say, a nursing model is the same as the concept of a nursing model held by the student whom I am trying to teach. This student will try to give meaning to what I am trying to

Alan Kinghorn RMN CPN Cert FETC Continuing Education Department Manager, Staff Development and Continuing Education Department, Education Centre, South Cleveland Hospital, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, Cleveland TS4 3BW (Requests for offprints to AK) Manuscript accepted 1 January 1991

310

convey to him. His meaning will be constructed by him from his existing knowledge and concep- tions. His final concept of a nursing model may be very different from mine. It may be ‘wrong.’

A constructivist perspective, write Hewson and Hewson (1989) (citing Magoon 1977; Wat- zawick 1984 as their sources) provides an alter- native way of looking at this problem. Ausubel (in Entwistle 1987) makes the point that new concepts must be firmly linked to existing know- ledge in order to become established. If students’ existing knowledge varies from the generally accepted version, then that link may not be made because their interpretation may not match. A constructivist strategy for concept attainment allows students to form concepts from their existing knowledge instead of having concepts imposed upon them from without by a teacher.

CONSTRUCTIVIST MODEL

Constructivism is not a single theory, but a cluster of different, although related. perspec- tives with a united view of the world. There is, therefore, a great deal of variability within constructivism. The basic concern of constructi-

NURSE EDUCATION TODAY 3 I I

vism is how people make sense of the constantly Hewson (1989), are extremely resistant to changing nature of their experience. The core change as a result of previous traditional concern is the belief that people, particularly instruction. adults, are not shaped by circumstances beyond their control. They are ‘self-constructing’ in that they give meaning to their own reality indepen-

dently of any observation.

‘Learning may involve changing a person’s conceptions in addition to adding new know- ledge to what is already there.‘(p 193)

Rathbone (1974) states that the learner is This suggests that we need to know what the regarded (in a constructivist model) as: students’ existing conceptions are, and why they

hold them. ‘a self-activated maker of meaning, an active agent in his own learning process. He is not

one to whom things merely happen; he is the one who, by his own volition, causes things to happen. Learning is seen as the result of his own self-initiated interaction with the world, the learner’s understanding grows during a constant interplay between something outside

himself - the general environment, a pendu- lum, a person - and something inside

himself. his concept forming mechanism, his mind. In a very fundamental way, each learner is his own agent - a self-reliant, independent, self-actualising individual who is capable on his own, of forming concepts and of learning’.

Conventional concept attainment teaching strategies involve presentation of exemplars and non-exemplars of the concept to be learned.

Hewson and Hewson (1989) try to create dis- satisfaction amongst their students with regard to each student’s existing conceptions about the concept which is to be taught. Their existing conceptions often conflict with those to be taught and need to be demolished before new concept learning can take place. Traditional concept attainment strategies would point to ‘wrong answers.’ Hewson and Hewson (1989) refer to such answers as ‘alternative conceptions’ neither validating nor invalidating their worth. but seek- ing to make each student dissatisfied with their

Within such a conception, learning cannot conflicting opinions, until they are ready to take simply be a matter of memorising or acquiring the new material on board. knowledge. Instead, it is a constructive process which involves actively seeking meaning from (or even imposing meaning on) events.

Hewson and Hewson (1989) describe the con- structivist model in the following way. Humans, THE METHOD

they say, are:

‘knowing, active, purposive, adaptive, self aware beings whose knowledge and purposes have consequences for their actions. They must construct their own knowledge, using their existing knowledge to do so.‘(p 192)

Students will try and make sense of what is being taught or read in terms which are intelligi-

ble and useful to them. The student’s concepts may be so at odds with

what is being taught that they cannot integrate it and end up by merely repeating it ‘rote fashion’ without really understanding it. If the concept involves behavioural change on the part of the student, then this will not take place. These ‘alternative conceptions’, say Hewson and

The following describes a constructivist strategy used to teach the concept of ‘reflection’ which I have used about half a dozen times to date.

A set of examples was constructed to assess students’ existing conceptions about reflective activity and was utilised in a group situation using discussion rather than the individual inter- view approach described by Hewson and Hewson (1989). These examples were also used to frustrate students in their attempts to identify the criteria1 attributes of reflective activity.

Is reflection occurring here? If it is, what leads you to believe this? If you think that it isn’t happening, why do you think this? If you just can’t tell one way or another, what

3 12 NURSE EDUCATION TODAY

information would you need before you could tell? How would this information help you decide?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

A student of philosophy asks herself, ‘is there such a thing as free will, or are we all

subject to fate?’

A teacher is trying to demonstrate the concept of ‘empathy’ to a class of student counsellors. He draws on a personal experience and discloses this to his

students as an example.

A boy is making a paper aeroplane. The first time he flies it, it nosedives into the ground. He bends the trailing edges of the wings to form flaps and tries again. This time it stalls. He adjusts the angle of

the flaps until it flies straight.

During a conversation with a colleague, Susan loses her temper. Mary backs down and stalks off in a ‘huff. Later she thinks, ‘I should’ve been more assertive. Why can’t I stand up for myself more?’

After buying a sweater at a local shop, Chris finds that it is defective. He takes it back, intending to get a refund, but comes away with a credit note. On the way home he berates himself, ‘Why didn’t I stick to

my guns? They almost gave me the money!’

Two children are watching Doctor Who on the television one remarks, ‘I like Star Wars better.’

I think, therefore I am. (Descartes).

Dave, after a confrontation with a traffic warden, remarks heatedly to a friend, ‘They’re all like little Hitlers, that lot!’ His friend replies, ‘Don’t stereotype, you’re always doing that!’

After listening to a lecture by the world famous Professor Hobblecringe, a student returns home and writes up a set of notes outlining the main points of the lecture.

Whilst hiking on the moors Steve becomes aware that his rucksack is chafing and uncomfortable. He removes and empties it, repacking it with all the heavy items

distributed near the top. When he puts it back on he feels immediate relief.

These examples were tape recorded and

played back to the group, one at a time. After each example the facilitator asked the question, ‘Is reflection happening here?’ He listened to the

divergent replies but withheld comment as to their validity.

From an initial hesitancy, the group tends to move on to a more detailed discussion of the concept, but may not be able to reconcile their divergent views. The facilitator’s task is to actively listen to the discussion; questioning, summarising, clarifying and reflecting, but

never validating. At an appropriate point the facilitator must check out where the group is ‘at’ on an affectual level. It is to be expected that they will feel confused and perhaps frustrated. As the

examples are worked through, this confusion should increase until the facilitator notices some of the criteria1 attributes of the concept begin- ning to emerge. At this point he can begin to push gently for more consensus, ‘flipcharting’ those areas of attributes to which there is some

group agreement. There will emerge a crucial point at which the

facilitator must apply more pressure to solidify the concept, after which the group should have grasped it. The essential point to note is the fact that the group has constructed the concept, it has

not been ‘taught’ to them or ‘given’ to them. The group has created and given meaning to the concept. They ‘own’ it. Having said this, it should be remembered that existing conceptions are extremely resistant to change and continued exposure to constructivist methods may be needed before a new concept is ‘grounded’.

DISCUSSION

In common with any new teaching strategy there are inherent problems to begin with. Using this method demands facilitation skills of quite a high order. The teacher must remain neutral and unbiased. This is not as easy as it may seem at first sight. It is very easy, as my analysis of the transcript of the session alluded to above

KURSE EDUCATION TODAY 3 13

showed, to convey positive and negative influ- ences which are beneath the teacher’s awareness. It may also be tempting to write off the strategy as a total failure after only a few attempts to use it. As with any skill acquisition, competence is only achieved with practice and over time. A single trial of this method will be insufficient to calculate its worth. Joyce and Weil (1986) esti- mate that a minimum of 15 trials are necessary before any new teaching strategy becomes embedded into a teaching repertoire. It may take this long to feel confident in its use and to master the techniques.

Students will have to be prepared for the experience of being taught in this way. It may be traumatic to leap from transmission methods of learning to a constructivist strategy, as it was for students who were first exposed to the mystique of experiential methods with little or no preparation.

The advantages of this method are that the students themselves construct the concept out of the rubble of their previous meanings. They create the new meaning and therefore it becomes meaningful for them. They ‘own’ it. We can be sure that new knowledge is meaningfully grounded in old.

The disadvantages are that it takes longer than an objectivist model of teaching to carry out and if the process is aborted, or does not reach a satisfactory conclusion, the teacher’s reputation takes a dive (and perhaps his self-esteem.)

There is a danger that at the end of a session the concept to be learned has not been learned. As Hewson and Hewson (1989) point out, exist- ing conceptions are extremely resistant to change. Would there ever be a case for leaving a session unconsolidated, for sending students away whilst they remain confused and frus- trated? Providing that they were part of an ongoing course or programme I should say, yes, because additional input can always clear things up at a later date. However, classes who meet once only, or very infrequently, pose a dilemma. Is it educationally sound to confuse students in the hope that their confusion will stimulate further enquiry? For I would suppose that this would be the only reason for encouraging confu- sion. Some students would react in a positive

manner and clarify their own confusion, others would undoubtedly condemn both teacher and lesson to the ranks of the ignored, abhorred or simply stupid.

Dependence on the strategy is also a danger not to be underestimated. Over-reliance on a single strategy, regarding it as a panacea for all educational problems is bound to lead to trouble. The strategy must fit the subject matter. Having said this, I believe that strategies should be grouped together in common ‘cultures’ of simi- lar approaches. Perhaps the teacher would use several companion strategies from the same ‘stable’, as it were. Inclusion of this strategy within Schon’s educating for a reflective prac- titioner approach is one method to be con- sidered.

CONCLUSION

I have described briefly a constructivist approach to concept learning using a modified approach from that outlined by Hewson and Hewson (1989). Although the method described used a group discussion style, it is equally rel- evant to teaching on a one to one basis. I have used a similar approach when teaching individ- ual nurses care planning and nursing model concepts.

Whilst it does demand good facilitation skills I feel that this strategy is worth including in the teaching repertoire of nurse teachers. It is entirely in keeping with the student-centred androgogical approach advocated by most edu- cationalists today, and used wisely it will provide us with a powerful educational tool. Careful consideration must be given to the question of when to use this strategy, how often and with what subject matter. Because of its time-consum- ing nature it is unlikely to be widely used in basic nurse education. However, I do feel that it would be worth using to facilitate the acquisition of important concepts such as, for example, ‘health,’ ‘illness,’ ‘ quality,’ and ‘standards’ and ultimately the very concept of ‘nursing’ itself. I have used it to good effect when teaching the concepts of ‘standards’, ‘quality,’ ‘reflection,’ ‘as-

314 NURSE EDUCATION TODA)

sertiveness,’ ’ suicide,’ ‘counselling’ and ‘nursing

models’.

In addition to its use as a concept attainment

strategy I have found it very useful as an aid to

developing critical thinking and reflectivity.

Whilst trying to sort out their confusion and

dissatisfaction with the concept under scrutiny,

students are engaging in critical thinking,

discussion and reflection - in - action. At a time

when nurse educators are advocating reflective,

‘expert’ practitioners (Benner 1984), this can

only come as one valuable means of achieving

that goal.

References

Ausubel D 1987 Learning as constructing meaning. In: Entwistle (ed) New directions in educational psychology. Falcon Pless. London

Benner P 1984 From novice to expert. Addison Wesley. New York

Driver R. Erickson G 1983 Theories in action: some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education IO: 37-60

Driver R, Guesne E, Tiberghien A 1987 Childrens’ Ideas in Science. Open University Press, Milton Keynes

Dunkm M. Biddle B 1974 The study of teaching. Holt, Rineheart & Winston, New York

Entwistle N (ed) 1987 New directions in educational psychology. Falmer Press, London

Huntet- M 1984 Knowing, teaching and supervising. In: Hosford P (ed) Using what we know about teaching. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria

Helm H, Novak J D 1983 Proceedings of the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics. Cornell University. Ithaca

Hewson P W. Hewson M G A’B 1989 Analyzing and use of a task for identifying conceptions of teaching science. Journal of Education for Teaching 15: 191

Joyce B. Weil M 1986 Models of Teaching. Prentice- Hall International. New York, p 480

Magoon A J 1977 Constructivist approaches in educational research. Review of Educational Research 47: 65 l-693

McDermot L C 1984 Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today 37: 24-32

Mezirow J 1978 Perspective transformation. Studies in Adult Education 9. 2: IX- 164

Mezirow J 1981 A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education 32, 1 : 3-27

Mezirow J 1985 A critical theory of self directed learning. In: Brookfield S D (ed) Self directed learning: from theory to practice. New directions lor continuing education 25, Jossey-Bass. San Francisco

Osborne R, Freyberg P 1985 Learning in science. Heinemann. Portsmouth

Rathbone C H (ed) 1971 Open education: the Informal classroom. Citation Press, New York

Schon D A 1983 The refiective practitioner. New York, Basic Books

Schon D A 3987 Educating the reHective practitioner, .Jossey-Bass. San Francisco

Watzlawick P (ed) 1984 The invented reality. W U Norton, New York