In the book, In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms, Brooks and Brooks discussed the concepts, challenges, and strategies for applying constructivism in classrooms in a clear and straightforward manner. The book itself is divided into three parts. In part one, the authors defined constructivism explaining that students construct meanings through a quest for understanding their experiences, as they pondered about the challenges of implementing constructivist in an education system that emphasizes achievements measured by test scores rather than meaning and understanding. Following, in the second part of the book, Brooks and Brooks addressed the main criticism of the constructivist approach as well as common challenges for its implementation. Lastly, in part three, the authors exemplified through teachers' journal entries the reasons that tend to influence on teachers' decision in not applying constructivism to their classrooms, as well as offered recommendations regarding school reform. The definitions and examples described throughout the book agree with theories regarding the psychological foundations of curriculum and instruction. Indeed, constructivism comprises the construction of meaningful and authentic learning experiences based on the learners' prior knowledge, interests, and motivation, favored by social interactions among students and mediated by the teacher (Huang, 2002; Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013; Parkay, Anctil, & Hass, 2014). Brooks and Brooks cited distinguished curriculum theorists and scholars in the field of education such as Bobbitt, Bruner, Dewey, Gardner, and Piaget to support their case as to why it is important to implement constructivism to American classrooms. In fact, this book differs from others particularly in the practical manner that it addressed constructivism; instead of presenting a theoretical discussion among constructivist theorists, it goes beyond by showing how teachers can apply it to their daily classroom practices. When Brooks and Brooks proposed practical examples of the constructivist approach being applied to different classes, contexts, contents, and grade levels, they built a bridge between theory and practice. Furthermore, they exemplified that constructivism must be lived and experienced to be understood; in other words, the best way to understand constructivism is through experience. By demonstrating the constructivist approach through examples, such as engaging students in experiments to understand concepts of physics, they tried to evoke the essence of constructivism itself, not as something static or dogmatic, but as a learning experience that is progressively built. In this sense, Brooks and Brooks invited readers to experiment the constructivist approach so that they can reach their own conclusions, rather than blindly trusting dry theories.
Background: Although the contexts, structures and administrations of early childhood education (ECE) may differ internationally, effective pedagogical leadership remains an essential component in supporting young children's development and learning. This paper reports on a comparative study which considered ECE in two different settings, Finland and Florida, providing insight into teachers' perspectives on the characteristics of pedagogical leadership.Purpose: This study sought to investigate and compare the perspectives of ECE teachers and directors in Finland and Florida via their discourses about teachers' pedagogical leadership. The goal was to provide an overview of the ECE teachers' and directors' discourses in each location, in order to allow comparison and a better understanding of the influence of aspects including locational contexts, curricular guidelines and teacher preparation on the ECE teachers' and directors' perspectives. Method: A comparative case study design was used. The data consisted of semi-structured focus group interviews and individual interviews with ECE teachers and centre directors in Finland and in Florida. Data from the two locations were first analysed separately to identify the main discourses; secondly, discourses were compared collectively to reveal major themes. Findings: The analysis indicated a similar conceptualisation of distributed pedagogical leadership. However, differences were identified in teachers' expectations of independence in instructional decisions, and the extension of pedagogical leadership practices within and beyond the ECE centres. The analysis of discourses led to the identification of three major themes, which generated implications for teacher preparation, curriculum development and implementation, and ECE programme directions. Conclusion:The study enables a more comprehensible conceptualisation of teachers' pedagogical leadership as it emerged from teachers' and directors' discourses across two locations. Pedagogical leadership is recognised as an indicator of highquality pedagogy in early childhood education and the findings highlight the need to continuously support and strengthen teachers' pedagogical leadership.
This chapter reviews selected research about leadership in early childhood education (ECE) in Finland, Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and USA. A short general introduction to ECE in each country is offered, followed by the summary of the research conducted in the country in question. In addition, a comparative synthesis of research is presented in which the methodological choices, broader societal and educational background and the research contributions to understanding leadership in ECE are discussed from international and transnational perspectives. This review concludes that ECE is of growing interest in the countries included in the study and its impact is widely recognised. Furthermore, the review indicates that in Finland and the USA, there has been extensive research on ECE leadership research, while in Germany, Singapore, South Africa and Japan research into ECE leadership has only recently emerged. Despite the differences in the traditions and roots of leadership research, good quality early childhood education is seen as the main objective of the leadership in every country.
Empirical evidence suggests that college attendance by students with intellectual disability (ID) results in numerous short- and long-term academic and social benefits. However, insufficient literature has explored the attitudes of constituent groups of universities toward the social and academic inclusion of students with ID before introducing these students to educational programs on campus. This paper reports on the results of a survey applied to administrators, faculty, staff, and students of a Southeastern public university to examine their attitudes toward students with ID in college academics and social activities on campus. The differences in attitudes were also examined based on the participants’ academic discipline, gender, and role within the academic community. The results indicate that all constituencies on campus had positive attitudes toward the participation of students with ID in college academics. However, significant differences were found based on their academic disciplines; participants from the College of Education had the most positive attitudes, while those from the College of Business had the least positive responses. Recommendations for future research are included. The article emphasizes the benefits of planning inclusive post-secondary programs to include students with ID and create a welcoming education environment to provide the best possible education to all students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.