Promoting a Learning Community

Class Participation Assessment Rubric

Meritorius Post

1. View this document in page layout. There are 3 pages that are required to be completed.
2. Copy and paste your meritorious post in this text box. Indicate location of post.
Response to Café 2 Week One: Discussion Topic Two: Behaviouralism & Constructivism
Original post by Albert Bangma

Hi Albert
In answer to your question posted, I read Chapter 12 in Fosnot titled The Project Approach in Reggio Emilia by George 
Forman. As one who uses project based learning a lot (as a tech teacher it's probably pretty much a given) I was interested 
how projects were employed in a constructivist manner. One of the big take­aways for me was the importance of situating 
the learning so that it has a reference. The author talks of how students were to add white paint to a mural the students made 
and how they were considering how it would land on objects. Whereas in an American school, when students made fall 
leaves, they were displayed in a geometrically pleasing (?) pattern on the windows, with no context such as a bare limbed 
tree or the leaves on a 'ground' image to represent how they would appear in nature. I can distinctly remember the artwork 
we completed in grade school being placed in neat patterns for display, whereas using placement or staging, we can extend 
the exercise to discuss a myriad of options such as wind, gravity, and location incorporating objectives and themes from 
science, math, or social studies within the project. As a technology teacher situated learning is 'what we do', but this really 
reinforced the importance of context for meaning making.
Does behaviouralism have some instrumental value in coordination with constructivism?
While I cannot speak to practitioner purists, my pragmatic position is that the technique that has proven results over a period 
of time is the one that is deployed in those type of situations.  As stated previously in this course, I start with behaviourist 
leaning strategies for foundational skills and knowledge. My job here is providing the theoretical basics while also coaching 
on skill development. As the learners progress, more individualized project­based work is undertaken. The main constraint 
students have is covering curricular objectives. At the advanced level, the learner completes a proposal (a fairly 
comprehensive planning document in an engineering vein) that includes how they will meet the mandated objectives. My 
job here gravitates to advisor and facilitator. The emphasis now is on developing the skills necessary for the learner to be 
able to construct their own experience, similar to what they will have to do in the future when confronted with a problem. I 
step back and assist when asked or when I observe it is necessary. When I first tried this, this was the hardest thing to do, but
it has paid dividends in the amount of growth in the learner.
“Knowledge structures, as defined by Piaget, gain their coherence from special types of reciprocity among facts. This 
reciprocity makes it possible for the learner to reason beyond the givens of the elementary facts. The social context of 
learning most certainly accentuates the formal dynamics of reciprocity and thereby deepens the coherence of the concepts 
under study.” (Fosnot. 2005. L. 4628­4631).
We have to have the foundational facts in place in order to develop the higher order thinking skills that build off lower level 
knowledge. Relying on one to build the other, is this a bad thing?
While theorists and researchers distill positions down to explicitly pure methodologies, a classroom practitioner must work 
with all available tools and have the foresight to know when certain types of interventions are warranted. This of course 
takes time and experience. When I took methods classes in my teacher training, there was no class on how to integrate the 
various strategies. We had to figure this out for ourselves. While one does come to this through experience, it is at the 
expense of the quality of educational experience our first few groups of students get. This experience for the learner is not 
horrible (hopefully), but nor are they receiving our optimal product. The application of various theoretical methods are 
valuable as they give us strategic packets we can employ situationally as it presents. But to be beholden to one theory to the 
exclusion of all others is akin to a mechanic keeping an adjustable wrench and throwing out all other tools because the 
adjustable wrench is a favourite. We use all the tools in our tool box as they each have instances where implementation 
shows greatest efficacy.
 
Page 1 of 3
Document Policy #81
3. Apply the assessment rubric below to your post. Don’t forget to total the scores.
Criteria Indicators Score (total 15/ 5 each)
Sense-making  Post demonstrates an understanding of  5/5
and application readings and texts using quotations and all
claims about education are substantiated
with references to the literature
 Post is original and attempts to make
meaning of prior personal experiences and
identifies applications from the literature to
a current context
 Post introduces new factual, conceptual,
and theoretical knowledge into the
discussion
Building  Establishes a social and cognitive  5/5
community and presence online with the expression of
leadership constructive perspectives and affect. (This
can take the form of agreeing or
disagreeing to a comment, evidence that
you are attending to, understanding, and
thinking about other’s responses,
consensus building, forming goals,
objectives, encouraging, acknowledging,
and reinforcing one another’s
contributions).
 Extends discussion by asking peers or
group members literal questions
 Instructor posts are responded to where
appropriate (eg. where the instructor has
asked a question to you personally or
invited a class response)
 Post is on time
 Rules of netiquette are observed; all posts
are constructive in nature and show
evidence of application of course concepts
Communicating  Posting makes a concise point that is  4.5/5
clearly relevant to the topic and falls within
the realms of discussion on epistemology,
constructivism, and learning and e-learning
 Subject header is a unique summary of the
topic and promotes readership
 Spelling and grammar do not detract from
the message
 Where applicable, references are cited
with at least author, year, and title of
publication
TOTAL  14.5 /15

Page 2 of 3
Document Policy #81
4. Provide in 1 paragraph, a rationale for the self-assessment and grade allocation. Submit to the
assignment dropbox.

This post was a response to Café 2 Week One original Café post by Albert Bangma.
The Discussion Topic was: Does behaviouralism have some instrumental value in coordination
with constructivism?

This post relayed my personal practice of incorporating several learning theories into the
classroom experience. The self-chosen reading for the week, chapter 12 from Fosnot,
provided a basis for the argument presented. In the chapter the concept of reciprocity was
introduced and this held personal significance as it provided justification for the position
presented, that one requires foundational knowledge in order to develop the knowledge
structures one needs to be able to have a reciprocity of facts whereby cognitive interrelation is
negotiated. Personally this grounded the situated strategies used in the classroom. This post
quoted the reading chosen that supported the argument presented. The post relayed personal
context using the new concept of reciprocity of meaning. For this I submit a grade of 5/5. The
post elicited further discussion and meaning making among the group with a directed question.
Rules of netiquette were followed in the post branch and it was submitted in a timely manner.
For this I submit a grade of 5/5 for consideration. The post responds to the discussion question
with content relating to constructivism and learning. There are no to minimal grammatical and
spelling mistakes and thus do not detract from the message. The referenced reading used was
cited with required elements. Since the post did not contain a title, I submit a grade of 4.5/5.

Page 3 of 3
Document Policy #81