Empirical studies of constructivist learning environments do not always show the expected learning outcomes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Previous empirical research on the effects of constructivist learning environments has not consistently produced the expected learning outcomes. → Loyens 2008

Evidence¶

Loyens 2008¶

Loyens, S. M. M., & Gijbels, D. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: introducing a multi-directional approach. Instructional Science, 36, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9059-4

q2 · i? · review · r2

The special issue introduction, a narrative synthesis, attributes this to earlier effect studies, citing prior work (e.g., Segers 1996) with proposed explanations offered by Delva et al. "for why these learning environments do not always appear to fulfill their promise." No effect size is reported.

"Previous research has demonstrated that empirical studies regarding the effects of constructivist learning environments do not always show the expected learning outcomes"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The authors argue that constructivists talking about constructivist learning environments is not necessarily a paradox — related
• Cognitive constructivism has strong empirical support and suggests new directions for science education, and must be distinguished from metaphysical constructivism — reports the opposite
• The authors argue meaningful learning is possible outside environments labeled constructivist, including lectures — related
• Participation in a collaborative, project-based engineering design course produced gains only in declarative knowledge, not other knowledge types or interest — a narrower finding that bears on this claim