*This article is composed of selected excerpts from actual assets used by HYDRAFT® in the course of client consultations.
[1. New Ideology and Social Change]
New ideologies always emerge alongside criticism of the dominant value systems in society. These philosophical movements reflect a particular "spirit of the age" (Zeitgeist), and are the result of significant intellectual movements that attempt to reconstruct human cognition, power, and modes of expression, ultimately transforming worldviews. Therefore, philosophical movements are deeply connected to broader philosophical, scientific, and political changes in society, and the changes initiated in one domain often spread to others. This is why philosophical ideas impact literature, art, education, and even industries and technology.
[2. Constructivism, Structuralism, Post-structuralism, Deconstructionism]
To better understand constructivism, it is helpful to briefly examine structuralism, post-structuralism, and deconstructionism. Chronologically, the trend of these movements has been: ‘Structuralism - Constructivism - Post-structuralism - Deconstructionism’. Strictly speaking, constructivism, which originates in the fields of pedagogy and cognitive psychology, doesn’t directly inherit the specific philosophical ideas of these other movements, but it shares a certain similarity with deconstructionism in that it views the meaning of objects as constructed in the individual’s perception, rather than as a fixed absolute truth (objective reality). It’s worth noting that deconstructionism is generally considered a branch of post-structuralism.
Structuralism:
· Interprets human thought or social-cultural phenomena as ‘structures’.
· Emphasizes the primacy of the structure (system) over the human subject.
· Key figures: Ferdinand de Saussure, Jacques Lacan, etc.
Constructivism:
· Derives from cognitive psychology and pedagogy.
· Knowledge is 'constructed' through individual experiences and interactions.
· Similar in seeing the human-world relationship as a matter of ‘construction’.
· Key figures: Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, etc.
Post-structuralism:
· Emerges as a critique of structuralism.
· Meaning is not fixed but constantly deferred (différance).
· Emphasizes human indeterminacy, fluidity, and challenges structure.
· Key figures: Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida, etc.
Deconstructionism:
· Derives from post-structuralism but is more radical.
· Focuses on the dualities, contradictions, and absences in language.
· Attempts to deconstruct the text itself.
· Key figure: Jacques Derrida.
'Structuralism' interprets human worldviews, language, and culture as passively shaped by invisible, universal, and objective structures. In contrast, 'Constructivism' interprets humans as active agents who construct meaning through their experiences and perceptions, actively shaping the world. This context is key to understanding the current emphasis on the keyword 'experience'. However, few individuals or organizations fully understand and approach these conceptual implications.
[3. The Difference Between Structure and Construct]
The philosophical and theoretical ideas mentioned above all share the Latin root ‘struere’ (to build, to pile up) and are closely related to human creative acts such as architecture and design. To better understand these concepts, let’s briefly look at the difference between ‘structure’ and ‘construct’.
Architectural Context of ‘Structure’:
· A physical, fixed form.
· Technical and functional aspects.
Social Context of ‘Structure’:
· Pre-established, stable frameworks, systems, and norms.
· One-directional and static.
Architectural Context of ‘Construct’:
· A process of creative completion based on structure.
· Conceptual, creative, and imaginative in design.
Social Context of ‘Construct’:
· A dynamic, proactive, and creative process of change.
· Interactive and involves transformation and development.
To summarize, ‘structure’ is static and predefined, while ‘construct’ is dynamic and creative. However, these concepts are not oppositional; rather, one (structure) serves as the foundation, and the other (construct) involves the process of change and creation. Interestingly, many terms from architecture—such as module, blueprint, design, architecture, foundation, structure, build-up—are frequently borrowed and used in business, especially in fields like design, development, and planning. In fact, business activities are quite similar to architecture.
[4. The Relationship Between Structure and Construct]
As previously explained, structuralism and constructivism are closely connected. This is because ‘construct’ is the term formed by adding the prefix ‘con-’ (together) to ‘structure’. Similarly, post-structuralism and deconstructionism derive from adding prefixes to the words ‘structure’ and ‘construct’.
Structuralism:
· ‘Structure’ → ‘Structuralism’.
Constructivism:
· ‘Con-’ (together) + ‘structure’ → ‘Constructivism’.
Post-structuralism:
· ‘Post-’ (after) + ‘structure’ → ‘Poststructuralism’.
Deconstructionism:
· ‘De-’ (apart) + ‘construct’ → ‘Deconstructionism’.
Therefore, ‘construct’ inevitably contains ‘structure’. To conclude, constructivism was an attempt to move beyond the limitations of structuralism. Without a proper understanding of structure, it would be impossible to create the new ‘construct’ that constructivism envisions. As with postmodernism, post-structuralism also uses the prefix ‘post-’ to indicate not a complete break with structuralism, but an acknowledgment of its limitations and a beginning of critical reflection. Had these movements been in complete opposition, they would likely have used different terms or prefixes like ‘next-’.
[5. The Educational Context of Structure and Construct]
In education, ‘structure’ refers to the objective and necessary elements of teaching, such as instructors, knowledge, and curriculum. These stable, physical ‘structures’ must exist for students to effectively engage in ‘construction’. Once a learner achieves the intended goal, this ‘construct’ may at least temporarily become a ‘structure’. As discussed earlier, in education, ‘structure’ is an objective and essential element.
However, the reason we emphasize learner-centered philosophies like constructivism is that it focuses not just on using a given structure, but on how learners themselves actively ‘construct’ meaning and create their own new ‘structure’ through this process. Additionally, this learner-driven construction cannot occur independently. It requires continuous interaction within the learning environment and engagement with others involved in the process. To understand this relationship more deeply, we need to examine the etymology of the term ‘construct’. Understanding its origins will help clarify how the essence of learner-driven construction is connected to its conditions.
[6. The Development Perspective on Structure and Construct]
From the perspective of programming, the relationship between structure and construct is also fascinating. In object-oriented programming languages like Java, Python, and C++, the function ‘constructor’ is used to initialize an object. This initialization is not merely about starting from a void state like ‘0’, ‘null’, or ‘not’; it is a process of preparing the object so it can function meaningfully according to a specific goal. This process is about structuring the foundation of an object to allow it to exist purposefully. The subsequent development of this ‘structure’ to meet the intended purpose is the ‘construct’. Similarly, learners do not begin as empty vessels but are structured on a foundation by an instructor (the constructor), which then enables their gradual, self-directed ‘construct’ towards their goal.
[7. The Etymology and Implications of Construct]
The word ‘construct’ comes from the Latin ‘construere’, which combines ‘con-’ (together) and ‘struere’ (to pile up), meaning "to pile up together." Interestingly, the reason modern education tends to focus more on ‘construct’ than ‘structure’ seems to lie in this idea. The prefix ‘con-’ implies a humanistic understanding that humans are never alone in this process. Construction, after all, is ‘building together’.
Creating spaces for human beings—like architecture—is a collaborative effort involving many specialists (e.g., architects, structural engineers, surveyors, safety managers, interior designers, landscapers, carpenters, masons, electricians, plumbers, contractors, etc.). Similarly, everything we do in life is a collective effort. Perhaps what constructivism emphasizes in education is that the learning process involves the collaboration of students, instructors, students with each other, instructors with each other, and knowledge with knowledge—essentially, the entire human community working together.
[8. The Perspective of Post-structuralism and Deconstructionism on Structure and Construct]
One effective methodology for realizing constructivism is distributed learning, where learners and the learning environment are physically and temporally separated. From this perspective, the constructivism in education shares similarities with post-structuralism and deconstructionism. For example, both post-structuralism and deconstructionism do not see the ‘fixed meaning’ assigned to an object as absolute; instead, they emphasize the process of deconstruction and reassembly in order to explore its potential new possibilities. The environment they create is filled with fragmented pieces. Interestingly, the act of ‘constructing’ is no different from encountering fragmented pieces in this environment.
In other words, while the educational environment (knowledge, curriculum) is systematically structured, this structure comes to learners as fragmented and temporarily deconstructed. Once learners complete their construction towards a specific goal, it temporarily becomes a structure again. This cyclical process continuously repeats. In this flow, the essence of ‘construction’, as well as the essence of ‘growth’ and ‘experience’ in education, involves constantly deconstructing, recombining, and applying the inherent structures within ourselves, confronting and overcoming new crises, and seeking new possibilities.
[9. Conclusion]
To intuitively compare constructivism, one might say it is akin to architecture and design. From a structuralist point of view, learning is a system of pre-established principles, but from a constructivist point of view, it is an active and creative process, continuously shaping itself. Structure and construct are not opposites but complementary. Education, just like architecture, requires both. The interplay between structure and construct is essential for understanding how we learn and how knowledge is developed and refined. The more we understand the subtle connection between these two, the more we can deepen our understanding of the nature of human knowledge and experience.
© 2024 Hydraft®
All rights to this content are reserved by Hydraft® and are protected under copyright law. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are strictly prohibited.
