You are here:

Constructivism, Education, Science, and Technology

CJLT Volume 29, Number 3, ISSN 1499-6677 e-ISSN 1499-6677 Publisher: Canadian Network for Innovation in Education


Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to present a brief review of the various streams of constructivism in studies of education, society, science and technology. It is intended to present a number of answers to the question (what really is constructivism?) in the context of various disciplines from the humanities and the sciences (both natural and social). In particular the discussion will focus on four varieties of constructivism: philosophical, cybernetic, educational, and sociological constructivism.


Boudourides, M. & Boudourides, M. (2003). Constructivism, Education, Science, and Technology. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 29(3),. Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. Retrieved December 11, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Bijker, W., Pinch, T., & Hughes, T. (Eds.) (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  2. Bloor, D. (1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  3. Borradori, G. (1994). The American philosopher: Conversations with Quine, Davidson, Putnam, Nozick, Danto, Rorty, Cavell, MacIntyre and Kuhn. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  4. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Translated by R. Nice. London: Sage Publications.
  5. Brey, P. (1997). Social constructivism for philosophers of technology: A shopper's guide. Phil. & Tech., 2, 56-78.
  6. Bruffee, K.A. (1983). Writing and reading as collaborative or social acts: The argument from Kuhn to Vygotsky. In N. Hays et al. (Eds.), The writer's mind: Writing as a mode of thinking. Urbana: NCTE.
  7. Callon, M. (1986). The sociology of an actor network. In M. Callon, J. Law, & A. Rip (Eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. London: Macmillan.
  8. Cobb, P. (1990). Multiple Perspectives. In L.P. Steffe & T. Wood (Eds.), Transforming children's mathematics education: International perspectives, (pp. 200-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  9. Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1991). A constructivist approach to second grade mathematics. In E. Von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Radical constructivism in mathematicseducation, (pp. 57-176). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  10. Collins, H.M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage.
  11. Davis, R.B. (1990). Discovery learning and constructivism. In R.B. Davis, C.A. Mahler, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  12. Gross, P.R., & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore& London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  13. Gross, P.R., Levitt, N., & Lewis M.W. (Eds.) (1996). The flight from science and reason. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.
  14. Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  15. Kragh, H. (1998). Social constructivism, the gospel of science and the teaching of physics. Science& Education, 7 (3).
  16. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions (second edition, 1970). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  17. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Levitt, N. (1999). Prometheus bedeviled. Science and the contradictions of contemporary culture. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
  20. Lingua Franca (Eds.) (2000). The Sokal hoax: The sham that shook the academy. Lincoln& London: University of Nebraska Press.
  21. Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  22. Luhmann, N. (1990). Essays in self-reference. New York: Columbia University Press.
  23. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  24. MacKenzie, D. (1991). Inventing accuracy: A historical sociology of missile guidance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  25. MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (Eds.) (1985). The social shaping of technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
  26. Matthews, M.R. (1993). Constructivism and science education: Some epistemological problems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2 (1), 359-370.
  27. Matthews, M.R. (Ed.) (1998). Constructivism in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  28. Maturana, H., Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht: Reidel.
  29. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1987). The tree of knowledge: Biological roots of human understanding. Boston: Shambhala.
  30. Millar, R. (1989). Constructive criticisms. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 587-596.
  31. Mingers, J. (1995). Self-producing systems: Implications and applications of autopoiesis. New York: Plenum.
  32. Osborne, J. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80(1), 53-82.
  33. Papert, S.A. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1-12).
  34. Phillips, D.C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), October, 5-12.
  35. Phillips, D.C. (1997). Coming to terms with radical social constructivisms. Science& Education, 6(1-2), 85-104.
  36. Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
  37. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child, transl. H. Weaver. New York: Basic Books.
  38. Piaget, J. (1972). Psychology and epistemology: Towards a theory of knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  39. Pinch, T., & Bijker, W. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. Bijker, T. Pinch, & T. Hughes, (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology.
  40. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  41. Sismondo, S. (1993). Some social constructions. Social Studies of Science, 23, 515-553.
  42. Snow, C.P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  43. Suchting, W.A. (1992). Constructivism deconstructed. Science& Education, 1(3), 223-254.
  44. Tobin, K. (Ed.) (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education. Washington DC: AAAS Press.
  45. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. (M. Cole et al., Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  46. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. (A. Kozulin, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. (Original work published in Russian in 1934.)
  47. Winner, L. (1993). Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 18, 362-378.
  48. Woolgar, S. (1988). Science: The very idea. London: Routledge. Endnotes 1. Constructivism is not the only insight from psychology brought to science education by the so-called "cognitive revolution" in psychology of the 1960s. Another movement of the modern information-processing approach to cognition is the theory of situated learning (advocated by J. Lave [1988] among others), according to which learning is considered to be a function of the activity, context and culture in which it occurs, I.E., it is situated. In this point of view, situated learning emphasizes that knowledge is maintained in the external social world in contrast to the constructivist claim (at least in its "trivial" version) of the primacy of the individual's internal state in the meaning construction process.
  49. 10. Brey (1997) reviews such theoretical changes in the areas of social consequences, excluded social groups, macro-level analyses, and normative and political issues. © Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. From Ephemera to Building Blocks: Capturing New Understandings About Efficacy Beliefs Among Teachers in Learning Communities Using Repertory Grid Elicitation

    Ulana Pidzamecky & Roland vanOostveen, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2018 (Jun 25, 2018) pp. 1304–1314

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact