SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM IN FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

Social Constructivism provides a theoretical framework by which ineffective formative assessments can be better understood.  The  Social Cognitive Theory or Social Constructivism, was originally developed by Albert Banduras in 1963.  This theory is centralized around the view that individuals learn and grow through observation, imitation, and modeling. (Powers, 2020).   Lev Vygotsky describes the role of the educator in bringing the learner through the zone of proximal development or ZPD.   The ZPD is the “zone” of learning between the current level of cognitive development and the potential level of cognitive development.  Learners complete small, manageable steps in order to reach the goal while working in collaboration with a skilled instructor or more knowledgeable other (MKO) to make connections (Vygotsky, 1978).   Regarding assessment literacy, instructors needs to be able to access learners’ knowledge and understanding through multiple means of formative assessment in order to meet them where they are and scaffold their learning experiences accordingly.   In essence, this ZPD is also the “Zone of Formative Assessment”,  the instructor’s opportunity to learn information about the learner’s progress and adjust their practice accordingly.

One key concept in social constructivism is  the need for active learning, where activities are student-centered.  The educator is more like a facilitator who creates a social experience that allows for a gradual relinquishing of control of the learning from the teacher to the learner.  The nature of learning is socially constructed, where students themselves construct meaning in a collaborative environment (Kurt, 2018).

UDL AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM

The Universal Design for Learning is a practical and effective  framework which works well in tandem with social constructivism because while social constructivism informs the “what” of learning (ZPD) , UDL informs the “how” it takes place in a personalized way.  Educators strive to put the focus of control on the learner and their social experience (Craig and Van Lom, 2009).   UDL integrates technology as it organizes the individual’s experiential world and provides multiple avenues for the learner to develop constructive processes.  (CAST, 2018)  This is highly personalized form of formative assessment.

Teachers, like students, need professional development in assessment tools and strategies to meet students creatively and effectively at different stages on the spectrum towards new content acquisition.  Educators need opportunities for regular feedback on their own instructional practices by other teachers to provide opportunities for sharing strategies and collaborating on how to connect with students effectively.   We can examine the formative assessment of learners from the social lens of UDL:  engagement of learners, multiple representations of content, and enabling action and expression. (CAST, 2018)

Engagement

UDL and social constructivism meet in the objective of creating a social interaction between students and instructors that is engaging to many different kinds of learners.  Today, students engage not only with people who are physically present but also with online peers. Learning goals and curriculum outlines are designed around social interaction between students and instructors.  Instructors consider the learners’ individual learning preferences and needs when designing lessons in order to lead them through the zone of proximal development through multiple means of engagement.  Knowing how to adjust one’s practice based on the information obtained from formative assessments, is the art of good teaching.

In today’s schools, educators incorporate the use of mobile devices such as iPods, cell phones, and Netbooks into their instructional curriculum. (Mohammed & Kinyo, 2020).  Formative assessment using these digital tools act as an additional tutor that provides students with immediate feedback, personalized format and an opportunity for self-reflection, where students can guide their own learning while they are actively participating in their own assessment. (Cost et al, 2020)

Representation

By definition, scaffolding of learning cannot occur without first understanding the learner’s starting point.   Educators use multiple modes of representation in order to meet the learner where he/she is and lead them in a meaningful way through the learning process to the targeted learning goal.  Diagnostic assessments can be performed to assess for prior knowledge and can be done using multiple modalities.  The scaffolding process works well using a UDL framework as learners are given various ways of moving towards their learning goals.  Teachers, like students also need  training in order to become more proficient in their own assessment literacy.

Additionally, where live teachers are not always available to give immediate feedback, digital technologies give immediate and specific feedback to students, which allows them to guide their own learning, and intern increases their motivation.  (Cost et al, 2020)  By leveraging the immediacy of feedback using digital technology, they actively participate in their own assessment process even while the teacher is teaching.  Teachers can also receive real time feedback on student progress.

Action and Expression

Depending on the learning task, the principles of UDL postulate that individuals have multiple ways of expressing the successful acquisition of a given learning goal.  Social constructivists scaffold learning in such a way that both the learner and the facilitator work together to meet in the middle where communication is fluid and the transfer of knowledge and skills uses multiple modalities.  Furthermore, by using digital technologies to create PLEs (personal learning environments) and PLNs (personal learning networks), lifelong learning strategies are developed in the individual. (Mohammed & Kinyo, 2020). The idea in both UDL and social constructivism is that the relationship between student and teacher is the determining factor to decide both the mode and content of evaluation.

References:

Centre for Applied Special Technology, CAST (2018). Universal design for learning version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidlelines.cast.org

Cosi, A., Voltas, N., Lázaro-Cantabrana, J. L., Morales, P., Calvo, M., Molina, S., & Quiroga, M. Á. (2020). Formative assessment at university through digital technology tools. Profesorado, 24(1), 164–183. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v24i1.9314

Craig, T., Van Lom, M, (2009).  Impact Constructivist learning Theory and MobileTechnology Integration, Boise State University.  Retrieved  from https://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504676

Kurt, Dr. S. (2018, November 10). Inclusive teaching strategies. Educational Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/inclusive-teaching-strategies/

Mohammed, S., & Kinyo, L. (2020). Constructivist Theory as a Foundation for theUtilization of Digital Technology in the Lifelong learning Process. The TurkishOnline Journal of Distance Education TOJDE, 21(4), 90–109.https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803364

Power, R. (Ed). (2020). eLearning Essentials 2020. [eBook]. Power Learning Solutions. https://elearning2020.pressbooks.com

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on thedevelopment of children, 23 (3), 34-41