Constructivism and Instructivism in Teaching and Learning



This essay describes and analyzes the effects of the “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001” that was established in the United States and meant “to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessment”. As the No Child Left Behind Act’s main aim was to improve the quality of education in the United States, educators and teachers have been forced to ask uncomfortable but important questions as to how such improvement can be attained in their professional field. The researcer mentiones that countless debates have since taken place in the academic world to pinpoint where the problems lie in the hope of identifying the right and the best solutions. These debates have been heated and not without controversy, which is what makes them interesting. Of the wide range of debated topics, this essay focuses on one of the most basic battle lines – Constructivism versus Instructivism. The researcher then compares these two basic theories of how people learn and analyzes which of these two really works and is more effective. To conclude, the researcher gives his own recommendations on the topic and sums up that every teacher must learn how to account for one of the greatest missions anyone can receive, that of shaping other human minds and launching them on their way to learning, discovery, and survival in a complex world.