Recent neurological and psychological research (using scientific methodolgy as a basis, not theories e.g. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences, Bloom's Taxonomy, etc) is indicating that the constructivist models of learning, where 'process' is valued far more than 'content', are incorrect. Knowledge and thinking are interdependent and to think well, students must have knowledge.
Hi. We've got a group for history teachers, students and enthusiasts to share resources, bookmarks and ideas with each other. The focus is on helping history teachers and students share good-quality sources to improve the quality of history teaching and research. If you're a history teacher with a passion for innovation we'd love to have you along so please come and join at http://groups.diigo.com/groups/history-teachers. See you there! David.
Constructivist theories grew out of the work of a couple of Russians around the time of the Russian Revolution. It is radical subjectivism dressed up as science, and has no scientific credibility whatsoever. It is used by radical educators to push their barrow that nothing the teacher knows is worth the student learning and that all knowledge is innate. It's bullsh*t. Theories like this rot are part of the reason that the bottom has dropped out of Western education and we have a generation who can't write. This should be resisted by any educator with an interest in educational excellence.