The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rethinking science education: Beyond piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning
Abstract
In the first part of the article I present an epistemological critique of forms of pedagogy founded on Piagetian constructivism. Despite the appeal of the notion that learners construct their understanding, I argue that constructivism is problematic because it ignores the subjectivity of the learner and the socially and historically situated nature of knowing; it denies the essentially collaborative and social nature of meaning making; and it privileges only one form of knowledge, namely, the technical rational. I then present a critique of active learning and student‐centered forms of pedagogy. I argue that in our models of teaching we rely on too many unexamined assumptions from developmental psychology and we take for granted the problematic notion that children learn by doing. My central thesis is that constructivism is flawed because of its inability to come to grips with the essential issues of culture, power, and discourse in the classroom. In the concluding section of the article I present a preliminary account of a sociocultural approach to teaching and learning that takes seriously the notion that learning is situated in contexts, that students bring their own subjectivities and cultural perspectives to bear in constructing understanding, that issues of power exist in the classroom that need to be addressed, and that education into scientific ways of knowing requires understanding modes of classroom discourse and enabling students to negotiate these modes effectively so that they may master and critique scientific ways of knowing without, in the process, sacrificing their own personally and culturally constructed ways of knowing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life
Lave, J. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609268 · Cited by 5,148
Cited by
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250989 · Cited by 1,587
Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science
Aikenhead, G. S. (1996) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057269608560077 · Cited by 1,049
Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057260701828101 · Cited by 747
Co‐constructing inquiry‐based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform
Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.1023 · Cited by 555
Discourse Patterns and Collaborative Scientific Reasoning in Peer and Teacher-Guided Discussions
Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (1999) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1704_2 · Cited by 460
Metadata
- Authors
- O'loughlin, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-10
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 791-820
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2057570607
- Cited by
- 382
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 66.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rethinking science education: Beyond piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.3660290805
- The paper
- O'loughlin, M. (1992). Rethinking science education: Beyond piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290805
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.