Constructivist vs. Traditional Classroom

Short clips comparing a Traditional Classroom and a Constructivist Classroom for EDIT 501

Category:

Education

Tags:

• constructivism
• EDIT 501

[mrmarchistory]

FYI this video was done for a class project. It has little educational value and as you can see my acting and cinematography skills are extremely limited (read non-existent), but not bad for pulling this together by myself. Although many of you vehemently defend traditional classrooms I stand by my assertion that Constructivist classrooms can create a much better and more engaging learning environment.

On a lighter note, some of you need to check your spelling and grammar.

[GetSmart008]

Soc Constructism is teach like BORG, group collective will think for you until you are incapable to think for yourself, a mindless drone and automaton - how blockish Soviet blockish [ref] Lev Vygotsky Soviet pysch. Teacher is a DFR in social constructivism and weaker students gavitate towards leaching. Do this for for a few years and students become braindead. The teacher teaches nothing in Soc cons. If you want real learning try Socratic teaching which is not the same as direct instruction.

[enjenumbr9]

Earn a constructivist-based education and you, too, can live in an apartment with water stains on the ceiling and shlep around in a ball cap with all your roomies while you trip over your Walmart furniture and chat about Cinco de Mayo like all the other illiterates...."dude! I thought that was something else!"...who knows whether you'll ever actually learn the facts, as long as you feel good and it's not too boring, it's all good...

[abcwritestartread]

Really? Have you seen the chaos in a "constructivist". classroom. Go to a Freinet school kids doing whatever, leatnong when they want, delivering illiterates. I don't know many traditional classrooms where the teachers are this boring. Certainly not mine where kids learn and have fun.

[solanom]

This video is terrible! Redo it!

[blorgensteen]

your argument is invalid. since neither example takes place in the environments you're attempting to compare.one's a bad movie with cardboard instructor and the other is really bad theatre.

do a live comparison with actual classrooms, and you might have a chance at convincing someone.

[lancestar2]

Yikes!! a very aggressive response you failed to note I was saying for some people... meaning there is very different types of learners  and there isnt a one fits all solution also our schools do teach some bright students and they do have a lot of flaws Im mostly saying some kids who are shy and not very confident wont be very vocal and active in a group while some kids would thrive in a constructivist classroom there isnt any "holy grail" to education every way of teaching has pro's and con's

[MRUGD8]

@lancestar2 if you knew anything about constructivism, its based on developmentally appropriate practices meaning that you meet every single student where they are and differentiate instruction so that you can reach EVERY single student......soooo you are completely wrong. traditional classrooms don't differentiate at all and are obviously failing

[lancestar2]

I can smell the bias from here... you play off a tv show that intentional show class as boring while your skit you show excitement ...traditional classroom can be very effictive while your example of constructivist can be flawed for different type of learners....