...
Within the RJE framework, people’s experiences of justice and equity impact their sense of belonging within a community and in turn, impact their capacity to show up well in the learning environment. This is true for students and educators, parents and caregivers, and anyone else connected to the learning environment. Within RJE, and for us, justice is viewed as “honoring the inherent worth of all as enacted through relationship” (Vaandering, 2011, p. 307) where issues of power and domination are addressed (hooks, 2000; Vaandering, 2010). Equity, as opposed to equality where everyone is treated the same, can be defined as people getting what they need in order to experience well-being (Evans & Vaandering, 2016). Focusing on justice and equity in schools means that we actively respond to issues of oppression and marginalization, including those based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, and ability. Drawing on the writings of Paulo Freire (1970) and bell hooks (2000, 2003), RJE schools and classrooms work to ensure that the “vulnerable are cared for, the marginalized are included, the dignity and humanity of each person in the educational setting matters, and everyone’s needs are heard and met” (Evans & Vaandering, 2016, p. 68).
Constructivism
The philosophical base for the teacher education program is further informed by the theory of constructivism. Constructivism is a ubiquitous term that represents both a theoretical position and a set of instructional principles. For example, Fosnot’s (1996) understanding of constructivism is primarily theoretical, driven by a post-structuralist understanding of psychological theory that “construes learning as an interpretive, recursive, building process by active learners interacting with the physical and social world” (p. 30). Henderson’s notion of constructivism, by contrast, represents a more pedagogical understanding, viewing constructivist instruction as “any deliberate, thoughtful, educational activity that is designed to facilitate students’ active understanding” (Henderson, as cited in Fosnot, 1996, p. 9). The constructivist approach taken by the EMU teacher education program seeks to integrate theory and practice, recognizing the importance of both practice grounded in theory and theory practically applied.
While acknowledging various approaches to constructivist instruction, our conceptual framework is rooted in constructivist theory. Based on the foundational theories of both Piaget and Vygotsky, constructivists share the notion that learners are actively constructing their own understanding of concepts and are not mere recipients of knowledge that is passed along to them. While Piaget viewed this construction of knowledge as primarily occurring in the mind of the individual learner, Vygotsky (1978) emphasized the importance of social interaction in constructing knowledge. We value both perspectives and work to enhance the individual learning capacity of each student, while at the same time, acknowledging the sociocultural contexts of learning. This awareness of the “social, cultural, political embeddedness of teaching-learning is essential” (Gallagher, 2003, p. 132) and fosters the growth of transformative leaders, who not only engage in the realities of what exist but who also actively engage in social and cultural transformation.
Consistent with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning, we view students and teachers as actively participating in a community of learners where knowledge is synergistically constructed through social interaction between all members of the learning community. In that the act of teaching cannot be distinguished from the act of learning, teachers using a constructivist approach see themselves as co-learners with their students and value the assets of each member of the learning community. While a variety of instructional approaches might be used within a constructivist framework, the primary emphasis is on student questioning, active learning, creative problem solving, and collaboration. In such learning communities, teachers and students alike take responsibility for assessing and solving problems collaboratively, not through mechanistic “cook book” recipes, but by asking, “What decisions should we be making,” “On what basis do we make these decisions,” and “What can we do to enhance learning?”
...