Constructivist-Oriented Approach ( extracted from Chap.1 and 2)

Not every educator believes in the constructivist-oriented approach to teaching mathematics. Some of their reasons include the following: There is not enough time to let kids discover everything. Basic facts and ideas are better taught through quality explanations. Students should not have to “reinvent the wheel”. How would you respond to these arguments?

One of the definitions to learn Mathematics is to relate the existing ideas with the new ideas. In between of those two ideas, there is existence of our logical connections or relationships that have developed between and among ideas. That logical connection cannot be made when learners do not access the potential relevant ideas when learning new concepts.

Construction of knowledge requires reflective thought; actively thinking about or mentally working on an idea. The process of these reflective thought is essential in making those relation, and time is the element to assure reflective thought is happening.

As teachers, there are two roles, which we can do;

• Innitially, giving examples to students, where assimilation takes place.
• Secondly, giving examples of the students' presence thinking, by showing variations, then moving on to accomodation, in which scaffolding from adults are needed to engage in this process. 

Understanding all of those processes that are taking place in building children's critical thinking, there is a need for students to 'reinvent the wheel', even for basic ideas and facts, with a proportionate time given.

Piaget says: "If we don't give any confusions to the children, the learning is not completed"