Constructivism: Defense or a Continual Critical Appraisal A Response to Gil-Pérez et al.

Mansoor Niaz, Fouad Abd-El-Khalick, Alicia Benarroch, Liberato Cardellini, Carlos E. Laburú, Nicolás Marín, Luis A. Montes, Robert Nola, Yuri Orlik, Lawrence C. Scharmann, Chin-Chung Tsai, Georgios Tsaparlis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This commentary is a critical appraisal of Gil-Pérez et al.'s (2002) conceptualization of constructivism. It is argued that the following aspects of their presentation are problematic: (a) Although the role of controversy is recognized, the authors implicitly subscribe to a Kuhnian perspective of `normal' science; (b) Authors fail to recognize the importance of von Glasersfeld's contribution to the understanding of constructivism in science education; (c) The fact that it is not possible to implement a constructivist pedagogy without a constructivist epistemology has been ignored; and (d) Failure to recognize that the metaphor of the `student as a developing scientist' facilitates teaching strategies as students are confronted with alternative/rival/conflicting ideas. Finally, we have shown that constructivism in science education is going through a process of continual critical appraisals.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)787-797
Number of pages11
JournalScience & Education
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - 2003

Cite this