Abstract
Learning theories such as behaviourism, Piagetian theories and cognitive psychology, have been dominant influences in education this century. This article discusses and supports the recent claim that Constructivism is an alternative paradigm, that has rich and significant consequences for mathematics education. In the United States there is a growing body of published research that claims to demonstrate the distinct nature of the implications of this view. There are, however, many critics who maintain that this is not the case, and that the research is within the current paradigm of cognitive psychology. The nature and tone of the dispute certainly at times appears to describe a paradigm shift in the Kuhnian model. In an attempt to analyse the meaning of Constructivism as a learning theory, and its implications for mathematics education, the use of the term by the intuitionist philosophers of mathematics is compared and contrasted. In particular, it is proposed that Constructivism in learning theory does not bring with it the same ontological commitment as the Intuitionists' use of the term, and that it is in fact a relativist thesis. Some of the potential consequences for the teaching of mathematics of a relativist view of mathematical knowledge are discussed here.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Benacerraf, P. and H. Putnam (eds.): 1964,Philosophy of Mathematics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Bloor, D.: 1976,Knowledge and Social Imagery, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Bloor, D.: 1982, ‘Durkheim and Mauss revisited: Classification and the sociology of knowledge’,Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 267–298.
Brouwer, L. E. J.: 1912,Intuitionism and Formalism, in Benacerraf and Putnam, 1964, pp. 66–77.
Feyerabend, P.: 1978,Against Method, Verso, London.
Heyting, A.: 1956,Disputation, in Benacerraf and Putnam, 1964, pp. 55–65.
Heyting, A.:1964,The Intuitionist Foundations of Mathematics, in Benacerraf and Putnam, 1964, pp. 42–49.
Hollis, M. and S. Lukes (eds.): 1982,Rationality and Relativism, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Kilpatrick, J.: 1987, ‘What constructivism might be in mathematics education’,Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Montreal, Vol. 1, pp. 3–27.
Kline, M.: 1980,Mathematics-The Loss of Certainty, Oxford University Press.
Lerman, S.: 1983, ‘Problem-solving or knowledge centred: The influence of philosophy on mathematics teaching’,International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,14(1), 59–66.
Lerman, S.: 1986,Alternative Views of the Nature of Mathematics and Their Possible Influence on the Teaching of Mathematics, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, King's College (KQC), University of London.
Lerman, S.: 1987, ‘Investigations, where to now? or problem-posing and the nature of mathematics’,Perspectives, No. 33, University of Exeter School of Education.
Lerman, S.: 1988, ‘A social view of mathematics-implications for mathematics education’, Paper presented at Sixth International Congress on Mathematical Education, Budapest.
Stove, D.: 1982,Popper and After-Four Modern Irrationalists, Pergamon Press.
Weyl, H.: 1963,Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science, Atheneum, New York.
Wittgenstein, L.: 1967,Zettel, Edited by Anscome, G. E. M. and Von Wright, G. H., Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Wittgenstein, L.: 1974,Philosophical Grammar, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lerman, S. Constructivism, mathematics and mathematics education. Educ Stud Math 20, 211–223 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00579463
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00579463