Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist

dichotomy?

..........................................

Aprendizaje significativo: ¿el fin de la dicotomía social e individual constructivista?

Aristoteles Alexander Álvarez-Correa

Sonia Ruth Quintero-Arrubla

ABSTRACT

In educational theory, constructivists of

diverse philosophical inclinations debate

between social and individual constructivism

and assume themselves as immovable in the

apparent irreconcilable disagreement of their

epistemes, generating confusion in the

interpretation and implementation of the

theory of constructivism. Consequently, this

paper seeks to reconcile the social and

individual constructivist currents through the

exposition of their common theoretical

premise. The method that guided the writing of

this article was the contrast between authors

and theories through educational reflection

and hermeneutics applied to written texts. A

total of 30 documents were selected from

databases such as Scopus, EBSCO, Scielo and

Google Scholar, from which 22 articles of

different types were taken to strengthen the

theoretical discussion. Thus, it was found that

constructivist theories encompass the

construction of knowledge as processes that,

although derived from different conceptions of

cognition and learning, agree in postulating

that the learner is the protagonist of his or her

Received: June 29, 2022

Approved: December 01, 2022

...........................................

Master in Education. Universidad

Católica Luis Amigó, Medellín,

Colombia. E-mail:

aristoteles.alvarezco@amigo.edu.co

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-

5783-4995.

Master in Education. Universidad

Católica Luis Amigó, Medellín,

Colombia. E-mail:

sonia.quinteroar@amigo.edu.co ORCID:

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4835-

2593.

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

own learning process. It was concluded that

meaningful learning represents a link between

individual and social constructivist theories,

since it is the common vertex of both currents.

Keywords: meaningful learning; individual

constructivism; social constructivism; learning

material.

ABSTRACT

En la teoría de la educación, constructivistas de

diversas inclinaciones filosóficas se debaten

entre el constructivismo social e individual y se

asumen como inamovibles en la aparente

desavenencia irreconciliable de sus epistemes,

generando confusión en la interpretación y

puesta en práctica de la teoría del

constructivismo. Por consiguiente, este

documento busca reconciliar las corrientes

constructivistas, social e individual, por medio

de la exposición de su premisa teórica común.

El método que guio la escritura de este artículo

fue el contraste entre autores y teorías a través

de la reflexión educativa y la hermenéutica

aplicada a textos escritos. Se seleccionaron un

total de 30 documentos de bases de datos como

Scopus, EBSCO, Scielo y Google Académico, de

los cuales se tomaron 22 artículos de diferente

tipo para fortalecer la discusión teórica. De

esta manera, se encontró que las teorías

constructivistas engloban la construcción de

conocimiento como procesos que, aunque

derivados de diferentes concepciones de la

cognición y el aprendizaje, concuerdan en

postular que quien aprende es el protagonista

de su propio proceso de aprendizaje. Se

concluyó que el aprendizaje significativo

representa un vínculo entre las teorías

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

constructivistas individuales y sociales pues es

el vértice común de ambas corrientes.

Palabras clave: aprendizaje significativo;

constructivismo individual; constructivismo

social; material de aprendizaje.

Introduction

Throughout the history of human beings, education has played an important role, so

much so that it has been modified or adapted due to the "search for success", to the

cultural characteristics and the immediate environment where education occurs, and

even due to ideologies underlying educational proposals (Peláez & Usma, 2017; Usma

& Peláez, 2017; Valencia, 2013). In other words, education and its foundations have

been, and will probably be, deconstructed and reconstructed with increasing speed

(Álvarez-Correa, Mejía-Castro, & Ruth, 2020). Thus, in recent decades, constructivist

pedagogical currents are those that have received the greatest boom and attention in

the field of education. This fact, far from ending the existing ideological polarization

in the educational field, has led to an even more pronounced dissociation between

researchers, teachers and educational managers who converge in declaring themselves

constructivists, but diverge with regard to the social or individual perspective of this

educational current. This argument is not intended to make any apology for the

supposedly eclectic position to which some teachers are "circumscribed", but it does

propose a holistic and integral perspective of the constructivist issue.

For this reason, the main objective of this article is to postulate meaningful learning

as a common concept that, by its nature, could avoid the usual social/individual

constructivist dichotomy. The thesis is defended that meaningful learning is a decision

and fits quite well in the constructivist theory, both social and individual, of

knowledge. To defend this idea, the principles, potentialities, strategies and

limitations of the theory of meaningful learning are presented, the subject of the

material implemented to favor the mentioned type of learning is problematized, and

the reflection closes by establishing the connection between the social and individual

perspectives on the construction of knowledge. The whole reflective process of which

this document is composed emerges from a research carried out by the research group

'History, childhood and culture' of the Catholic University Luis Amigó. This research

was entitled: Pedagogical strategies implemented to enhance mathematical logical

thinking and its contribution to the teaching-learning process in childhood from the

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

practice experiences in the Bachelor's Degree in Early Childhood Education during the

period 2018-2019.

With Vygotsky's contributions, the theories of learning and teaching took a turn.

According to Vygotsky (1995), the process through which human beings internalize

and construct habits and knowledge goes from the interpsychological (social) to the

intrapsychological (individual), that is, "every higher mental ability appears twice in

the life of the individual" (Lantolf, 2000, p. 17). Likewise, it is understood that theories

on teaching and learning do not disregard previous contributions such as these,

although they do adopt or decline some of their postulates. This is the case of the

theory of meaningful learning, which, according to Ausubel (1983), is the interaction

of new information with the individual's previous knowledge (previous cognitive

structure), this interaction being driven by the motivation of the learner.

This perspective of the learning process could be understood as dialogical in that the

individual establishes an inter- and intrapsychological interaction. In other words,

"cognitive development is the conversion of social relations into mental functions."

(Moreira, 1997, based on Vygotsky, p. 7). Additionally, from Ausubel's proposal, the

teacher can be seen as a mediator so that the learning of his students is meaningful.

Regarding this, Juárez (2015) points out that the teacher must offer situations based

on the knowledge of the students' abilities. However, what has been mentioned up to

this point would be the beginning of the spiral, i.e., the knowledge built in this

psychological interaction is the foundation for the construction of new ideas, which in

turn will be the basis for many others (Juárez, 2015).

In a world where ideas about reality flow like a vertiginous and rapid affluent, it is

understandable that there is a hodgepodge of theorizations whose foundations are

diverse (Álvarez-Correa, 2019; Bauman, 2004; Berman, 1998). In the same way, there

has been uproar in education every time a new pedagogical current or some theory

about the mental representation of the knowledge that surrounds the person emerges.

Among these philosophical currents applied to pedagogy is constructivism. In this

regard, it is understood that the construction of knowledge occurs when the learner

relates the information obtained from multiple sources with his or her previous

knowledge to give birth to a new and particular idea, concept or structure, that is, the

construction of knowledge goes beyond memorizing the teacher's discourse, it has to

do with its innovation, it is a different version even if it is based on a certain source

(Barriga and Hernández, 2002).

Likewise, it is possible to state that "The fundamental premise of constructivism is

precisely the active construction by students of their own knowledge, through

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

incorporating and relating new information to previous knowledge." (Elboj,

Puigdellívol, Soler, & Valls, 2018, p. 48). Based on these conceptualizations of what

constructivism is, it is possible to somberly glimpse the social - individual

constructivist dilemma. On the one hand, the active participation of the student to

incorporate and relate information, which will become knowledge, is mentioned. On

the other hand, it can be noted that these "diverse sources", from which the

information comes, refer to the surrounding context, that is, the devices, tools and

people that surround the learner. However, both the social (constructionist) and the

individual (constructivist) perspectives, in spite of the simple allegory being presented,

share the idea that the learner is not a passive subject but someone who has everything

to do with his own learning process, that is, with his own elaboration of knowledge.

Materials and methods

This reflective article had two ways of methodological action as a source of

nourishment for the threaded discussion. On the one hand, a symbolic discussion was

established between the postulates of the most representative authors of the theories

of meaningful learning and constructivism seen from the individual and social

approach. In this way, hermeneutics, from a qualitative perspective, applied to the

interpretation of texts, was implemented as a research method. In other words, the

hermeneutic method was used for the "construction of knowledge from the material

culture" (Galeano, 2012). Hermeneutics, from the perspective of these authors, is

understood as a process of interpretation and construction of meaning through the

contrast between prejudices, axioms and imaginaries, the social phenomena

experienced or reported and the text per se with all its symbolic and contextual load

(Ángel, 2011; Chernobilsky, 2006; Herrera, 2010).

On the other hand, a literature search was necessary to make way for the dialectic

established around the topic in question. Thirty documents were taken from different

national and international databases, namely: Scopus, EBSCO, Scielo and Google

Scholar. Of these selected documents, 22 were taken into account, including articles

of diverse typology and books, to thread the proposed lucubrations and postulates.

Significant contributions, found and highlighted in the texts consulted, were taken and

passed to an information analysis matrix prepared by the researchers. Once in the

matrix, each theoretical postulate was contrasted in the light of the contrary

propositions, in this way, a dialectic was channeled that shed light on what is proposed

in this article as the end of the dichotomy.

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

Results

This section of the document will only address the most relevant aspects of the theory

of meaningful learning in light of the proposed topic of discussion and reflection; this

is because there is already a considerable variety of documents, such as those

referenced in the bibliography, which address the topic of meaningful learning in

depth, so it is not considered necessary to delve into issues that other authors

addressed in their reflections. Thus, in order to understand meaningful learning it is

necessary to take into account what Ausubel calls cognitive structure, according to

him:

[...] the student's learning depends on the previous cognitive structure that is

related to the new information, "cognitive structure" should be understood as the

set of concepts, ideas that an individual possesses in a given field of knowledge,

as well as its organization. (Ausubel, 1983, p. 1).

In this way, the pre-existing cognitive structure is constantly modified with the new

constructions, in the same way, these new constructions derive in new bases of the

mentioned structure, also called subsumers, which will become part of a "new"

structure that in turn will serve as a foundation for the learner to approach new

knowledge. This cyclical process of construction is what Ausubel refers to as

Meaningful Learning. In fact, Ausubel himself states that:

Meaningful learning occurs when new information "connects" with a relevant concept

("subsunsor") pre-existing in the cognitive structure, this implies that, new ideas,

concepts and propositions can be meaningfully learned to the extent that other

relevant ideas, concepts or propositions are adequately clear and available in the

individual's cognitive structure and that they function as an "anchor" point to the first

ones (Ausubel, 1983, p. 2).

In this sense, the cognitive structure of which Ausubel speaks can be understood as a

hierarchy of subsumers (Moreira, 1997). However, it is not reduced to this. Ausubel

also speaks of what he calls subordinate learning and superordinate learning. The

former refers to the process in which new information becomes part of a more general

idea or construct, while the latter has to do with the construction of a new subsumer

whose purpose is to subordinate that which made its construction possible, i.e., the

concepts or propositions from which it is understood.

In the words of Díaz-Barriga and Hernández (2002):

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

This means that we process information that is less inclusive (subordinate facts and

propositions) in such a way that it becomes subsumed or integrated by more inclusive

ideas (called supraordinate concepts and propositions). Thus, sometimes we learn

content that has to be integrated into more general and abstract schemas; at other

times, we learn precisely integrated concepts that agglutinate or subsume issues we

already know. (p. 39)

However, Ausubel not only focuses his contributions on the description of the

cognitive process, but also proposes some theoretical strategies to facilitate

meaningful learning. Moreira (1997) recognizes at least two strategies in Ausubel's

theory: on the one hand, he speaks of substantive facilitation as a prior and essential

conceptual analysis of what is to be taught; on the other hand, he mentions

programmatic facilitation, which is simultaneously subdivided into four principles:

Progressive Differentiation. First, an inclusive and general whole is presented, and

then, gradually, differences are established in terms of the content being worked on.

Integrative Reconciliation. This principle has to do with the possible correspondence

between ideas, that is, the contrast and establishment of relationships between them.

Likewise, it seeks to find pronounced differences between these ideas and, as its name

indicates, to arrive at the reconciliation of these disagreements.

Sequential Organization. Based on the previous step, it proposes to sequence the topics

and divide them into smaller and more digestible fragments or units, taking into

account the possible relationship between a topic and the topic that follows or precedes

it.

Consolidation. It implies that what follows, in terms of teaching content, is based on

the new subsumers that the student has according to the previous teaching (or

previous thematic unit).

Meaningful learning has a progressive character, it develops through time and

experience, which leads to a change in the cognitive structure and makes it possible to

endow the emerging content of these constructions with significance. Now, when the

Ausubelian theory is analyzed in depth, it is possible to realize that when one learns

significantly, one does not necessarily learn something "correct" or "true"; it is enough

that what is learned is related to the previous or existing cognitive structure for the

learning to be significant. That is, "whenever there is a non-arbitrary and substantive

connection between new information and relevant subsumers meaningful learning

occurs, but this [sic] can be wrong from the point of view of a user community." (Silva,

2011, p. 86). Understand that, on the one hand, the substantivity of knowledge is the

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

relationship that is made between what is already known and the understanding of the

new knowledge that is being learned, i.e., it is not a process in which the information

that the teacher tries to teach is copied and pasted, it is rather an elaboration, a new

and authentic understanding that the student makes. On the other hand, the

relationship must not be arbitrary, that is, the new knowledge is not randomly related

to any previously existing idea in the cognitive structure, but to subsumers specifically

relevant to what is being learned.

However, we could say that, since the subject learns by relating new information to

pre-existing cognitive structures (subsumers), then the "same" knowledge, fact,

information, object or "reality" can be assigned different meanings. Therefore,

assuming that in order to learn we relate what we learn with previous knowledge,

relevant to what is learned, then absolute truth, objective reality and any attempt of

intellectual totalitarianism deserves the contempt of this theory. Likewise, and

considering this reflection, one can question what is "correct learning", one can even

go further and ask if there really is such a thing as correct knowledge that someone

aspires to learn. In fact, "When we face a given phenomenon, the content of the mental

representations we build depends on the questions we want to answer, it depends on

the needs, interests and emotions of the individual." (H. Rodriguez, 2008, p. 74).

In this way:

Predisposition to learn and meaningful learning have a practically circular

relationship: meaningful learning requires a predisposition to learn and, at the same

time, generates this type of affective experience. Positive attitudes and feelings in

relation to the educational experience are rooted in meaningful learning and, in turn,

facilitate it (Moreira, 1997, p. 14).

Likewise, the material is potentially meaningful when it is "relatable to the cognitive

structure in a non-arbitrary and non-literal way" (Moreira, 1997, p. 13). This implies a

responsibility on the part of the teacher in terms of selecting or designing the material

in an intentional and deliberate manner, in addition to promoting a playful attitude

(Quintero, Ramírez & Jaramillo, 2016) with his or her actions, and, on the other hand,

it makes the learner responsible because there must be a disposition on his or her part

for meaningful learning to take place. Meaningful learning is a decision. In this sense,

it is necessary to have a disposition towards this type of learning on the part of the

learner and, in addition, the teacher must have the learner's previous knowledge in

mind so that he/she can include it in the syllabus when planning the classes. From the

latter derives, for example, the selection, sequencing and presentation not only of the

content but also of the learning material.

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

On the other hand, what happens when someone wants to learn something and does

not have the subsumers, or prior knowledge, necessary for this learning to occur?

Piaget would have said that, in this case, the subject has two options: the first consists

of giving up, while the second has to do with modifying himself (Moreira, 1997). If he

chooses the first option, the learner would be giving up learning whatever he was

interested in learning. On the other hand, if he chooses the second option, he would

be agreeing to restructure the existing assimilation schemes, that is, he would modify

the assimilation schemes he has at the moment, with the objective of having a cognitive

structure that allows him to relate to the knowledge that, at the moment, is unknown

or foreign to him. This second option is not limited to the new construction of

meanings, ideas and concepts. It happens that, additionally, this construction allows

establishing new relationships with the previous structure, which in turn is renewed

as these new constructions are elaborated (Barriga and Hernández, 2002). Because of

this, we speak of the possibility of restructuring or adapting the aforementioned

previous structure in favor of the learning that is to be achieved.

One of the possible favorable answers to this question is precisely the decision to

participate in a process of expansion, adjustment or restructuring of the mental

schemas (Piaget, cited in Moreira, 1997) or of the mental representations (Johnson-

Laird, cited in Moreira, 1997) with which the cognizing subject approaches that

remote, although cognizable, reality or knowledge. However, it is evident that if there

are not yet appropriate subsumers with which the new information can be related,

meaningful learning could not take place in the learning process. This is not a

pessimistic perspective on the unknown, but rather a confirmation that the disposition

of the learner is crucial for meaningful learning and, at the same time, it is a fact that

reminds us of our limitation when it comes to knowing.

In fact:

For Piaget, people build their intelligence and their knowledge of reality on the basis

of innate capacities, through the processes of assimilation and accommodation.

Children construct reality through the assimilation of the world around them and

develop cognitively by adapting pre-existing schemas to new situations. (Elboj, et al.,

2018, p. 48).

Consequently, learning, linked to motivation and willingness to learn, is presented as

a possibility that can be developed for any audience. As mentioned, it is a progressive

matter, it takes time and effort, and the demands and difficulties encountered along

the way will vary from one individual and/or group to another. With this, it can be

affirmed that intelligence and knowledge are developable and that each process is

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

particular in itself. On the other hand, it should also be taken into account that not

only is each process unique, but also the educational needs of each student, and even

more so, of each person. Up to this point, we have discussed what meaningful learning

is, the role that students and teachers play for it to take place, and the possible

strategies that one or the other could use to make this type of learning happen. Now,

what role does the learning material play in this process? The answer to this question

requires reflection not only on the material itself, but also on the intention of those

who select the material (teachers, usually), and on those who are involved in the act of

teaching (students, usually). Keep in mind that this reflection is not intended to assert

that the teacher teaches and the student learns, it is understood that both acts are

interrelated and interwoven in the process itself (Freire, 1997), if it is posed in this way

is only in order to facilitate the digestion of this approach.

Ausubel speaks in his theory of two types of meaning: potential meaning (logical) and

real meaning (psychological). Although both are related, the essential difference

between them is that while the former has to do with the material (always in relation

to the learner), the latter refers directly to internalization in a meaningful way, that is,

it is given by relating the new information to previous knowledge on the part of the

learner. This psychological meaning must be understood as the new construction that

the learner elaborates, a construction that is singular, in fact, unique. Thus, it should

be understood that the material and the way it is presented and sequenced may or may

not become logical meaning, and that once this logical meaning has become a new

construction, a construction with its own identity, we are talking about the desired

psychological meaning; that is, we are talking about meaningful learning. Avoid

confusing the genuine idiosyncrasy of the new construction with an unknown origin

of knowledge; in fact, what is referred to with this identity characteristic is, as Elboj et

al. (2018) put it, the construction of one's own understanding. In the words of L.

Rodríguez (2008):

Meaningful learning is a complex process that requires a predisposition to learn and

potentially meaningful material. Therefore, the process should not be confused with

the material with which it is carried out. Significance is not in the material itself, but

is attributed by the subject through the interaction he establishes with the subsumers

or anchor ideas present in his mind, as long as he wants to do so, that is, as long as he

has a favorable or significant attitude. (p. 29).

As already tacitly stated, meaningful learning requires that the relationship between

new information and previous knowledge, instead of being literal (mechanical or

repetitive learning), be substantial (Ausubel, 1983; Díaz-Barriga, 2003; Díaz-Barriga

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

and Hernández, 2002; H. Rodríguez, 2008; Juárez, 2015; L. Rodríguez, 2008;

Moreira, 1997; Silva, 2011). Likewise, meaningful learning is progressive in nature, not

instantaneous or fleeting. Ergo, despite the obstacles that the student may encounter

to learn a certain subject, learning is a process and intelligence can be developed, so

making the decision to develop the necessary subsumers to approach this distant

knowledge is the first step to achieve it.

When thinking about the material, its sequence and logic, attention is diverted to the

teacher. The problem is when the information is presented as unconnected, when the

relationship between topics and learning units is not used to establish a logical

sequence, in which the level of complexity rises gradually, it is difficult to guide the

student towards meaningful learning. In circumstances such as these, it is common

for students to opt for repetitive learning of isolated pieces of information with the

intention of passing the exam or obtaining at least an acceptable grade in the subject

(Barriga and Hernández, 2002). When mentioning the situation in which information

is presented by means of loose ends, unconnected and fragmented, we are criticizing

the disintegration that, in some cases, more than desired, occurs in the way in which

the information or knowledge to be taught is structured and presented.

Thus, the knowledge and procedures that the student learns, and many times develops

or builds, to face life situations outside school, may be partially or completely contrary

to those taught in the classroom (Carraher, Carraher and Schliemann, 1985). It is for

this reason that we insist on the importance of taking into account the context and its

potentialities to make it part of the daily construction of academic knowledge that is

done with the students; whenever it is the case. The procedures, which we can label as

artisanal, those that emerge in everyday life, can be favored by those developed in the

academy and vice versa. In this sense:

There is also evidence that informal procedures learned outside of school are often

extremely effective. [...] It seems quite possible, therefore, that children may have

difficulty with routines learned in school and, at the same time, be able to solve the

mathematical problems for which these routines were designed in other, more

effective ways. (Carraher et al., 1985, p. 21)

Context is fundamental in this process. It must be taken into account not only for

learning, but also, and even more so, for teaching. The interaction between the learner

and the surrounding environment allows the learner and the teacher to know what is

culturally rooted in what they learn or teach, what is shared in their specific context,

what knowledge is related to the socially constructed meaning. For this reason, it is

argued that both supraordinate and subordinate meaningful learning require the

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

aforementioned social interaction. This approach is aimed at reducing the gap between

the knowledge produced in the academy and the knowledge derived from the daily

practice that occurs in everyday life. Consequently, this responsibility is delegated to

the teacher, conceived as "an active subject, who in addition to participating in the

formulation of curricular proposals in the school context produces his own knowledge

that forge and enrich the activity of the teacher" (Ortega, 2017, p. 88).

However, it should be noted that the theory of meaningful learning does not seek to

detract at any time from the importance of memory. This basic learning device is of

great importance for cognitive development. While memory is not conceived as the

opposite of this mode of learning, purely rote, mechanical and repetitive learning can

be considered the antithesis of the theory of meaningful learning. This is why there are

divided opinions when it is proposed that everything depends on the decision of the

learner or when it is proposed that there is a shared responsibility on the part of both

the teacher and the learner. For example, Moreira (1997) states categorically that this

responsibility cannot be shared by the teacher. On the contrary, there are authors who

state that with a suitable selection and sequencing of the learning material, the teacher

can share this responsibility to the point of being comparable to the student's

responsibility (Barriga and Hernández, 2002).

In other words, it is up to the teacher, as long as his or her interest is to achieve

meaningful learning for his or her students, to direct the educational issue towards a

playful attitude of the students towards learning. It can be said then that, to a certain

extent, the teacher is responsible, although not completely, for whether meaningful

learning occurs or not. This responsibility of the teacher translates into the selection

of material. The material matters as much as the willingness to learn in a meaningful

way. With this positive attitude towards learning it is much more likely that the student

will make the decision to learn meaningfully, that is, the student must be determined

to establish a reciprocal relationship between learning, the object to be learned, and

himself, the subject who learns. However, this willingness will not be of much use if

the learning material is not potentially meaningful, and vice versa, potentially

meaningful material is of little use if there is no interest or willingness to learn

meaningfully.

Conclusions

As already mentioned, the central theme of this article is the role of meaningful

learning in the never-ending constructivist debate. Before mentioning anything else,

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

it is important to emphasize that both perspectives converge in that they do not

conceive the student as a passive entity and receiver of information, but rather as a

protagonist of his learning process; that is, as someone who elaborates his own

construction of knowledge based on the information of the surrounding context.

Although there are convergences between both perspectives, it is clear that there are

quite marked divergences or disagreements between the theorizations that have been

made in this regard. In fact, when Araya, Alfaro and Andonegui (2007) refer to the

different forms of constructivism, they cannot avoid expressing that "within it, trends

have emerged that privilege certain options, either individual construction or social

construction" (p. 85). Even Niemeyer and Mahoney (cited in Araya et al., 2007),

exhibit the social-individual constructivist dichotomy between the forms of

constructivist psychology they mention; to be specific, while Final Constructivism

refers to an individualistic perspective, of self-regulation and subjectivity, the Formal

Constructivism they speak of can be understood as a social constructivist perspective,

i.e., intersubjective.

Thus:

Let us recall that at the educational level, constructivism is concerned at the individual

and intrapsychic level with the way knowledge is constructed. It proposes an ideal

subject, whose mental functioning is explained thanks to internal mechanisms that all

subjects carry and that develop with considerable independence from the social

context. Constructionism, taking up the contributions of constructivism and genetic

social psychology, is interpsychic, collective and deals with the action of the subject in

the social field. (H. Rodríguez, 2008, p. 73).

Frida Barriga and Gerardo Hernández also problematize this issue as follows:

Is the mind in the head or in society, is development a process of cognitive self-

organization or rather of cultural learning within a community of practice, what role

does language-mediated interaction or communicative interaction play in comparison

with the self-structured activity of the individual (Barriga and Hernandez, 2002, p.

26), what is the role of language-mediated interaction or communicative interaction

in comparison with the self-structured activity of the individual (Barriga and

Hernandez, 2002, p. 26).

Here it can be seen that the unknown does not change in any of the questions. When

the mind is thought of as resting in the head, the perspective is individualistic, when it

is conceived of in society, the perspective is social. Similarly, self-organization is part

of the individual perspective while cultural learning within a community fits better in

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

a social perspective. Finally, a contrast is made between language-mediated

interaction and the self-structured or self-regulated activity of the individual. This

issue still revolves around the question of how cognizing subjects, called humans,

approach knowledge, how does the process of mental representation of what is

happening around us take place? About these mental representations it can be said

that they are lucubrations that seek to approach the knowledge of the world of

individuals, although, of course, it is a subjective construction that starts from

intersubjectivity. Therefore, there may be divergences between one and the other.

Likewise, and despite the desire of many teachers, what students learn is related to

their interests and needs and not necessarily to what the teacher teaches (H.

Rodríguez, 2008). For this reason, the sentence with which this document opens is of

utmost importance, at least as far as meaningful learning is concerned. Therefore, in

the human construction of knowledge of the world and its phenomena, not only does

the "thing" itself play an important role, but also the ideas one has of the world, which

give way to the construction of the aforementioned mental representations (H.

Rodríguez, 2008).

If we transfer this conception of the act of knowing to the field of education, we find

that "learning a content means that the student attributes a meaning to it, constructs

a mental representation by means of images or verbal propositions, or elaborates a

kind of theory or mental model as an explanatory framework of such knowledge"

(Barriga and Hernández, 2002, p. 32). (Barriga and Hernández, 2002, p. 32). This

reflection allows us to appreciate how the authors use two theoreticians to talk about

what only one of them proposed. It is assumed that they are referring to meaningful

learning, but while the first part of the quotation corresponds to something that

Ausubel would have said, what follows is something that Johnson-Laird would

probably have said. It is not that the authors have confused the theoretical

propositions of Ausubel and Johnson-Laird, it is simply that both authors are

constructivists and their theories contribute to the same issue; not to mention that

their contributions differ in terms of the perspectives from which they were thought.

This is due to the fact that, although the contributions of different authors have been

brought up, constructivism has never ceased to be mentioned at any time.

Therefore, when we talk about meaningful learning, we are still talking about

constructivism; it is one of the parts of the constructivist set. There are even those who

establish a relationship of dependence between meaningful learning and interaction

with others. For example, Moreira (1997) states that, without social interaction, it

would be difficult to speak of meaningful learning. According to this author, both

subordinate meaningful learning and superordinate learning require the exchange of

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

meanings; the negotiation of which Vygotsky speaks. However, this is seen to be the

case when the concept of meaningful learning is extrapolated to Vygotsky's theory. On

the other hand, if the relevance of context is thought of from a teaching perspective it

can be concluded that "for the development of meaningful learning one must know the

environment through the culture and customs that the child has in order to link them

to the teaching-learning process." (Juarez, 2015, p. 41). In the same way, H. Rodríguez

(2008), is categorical in asserting that social interaction is very important for cognitive

construction to take place.

On the other hand, the issue of the debate within constructivist theories has already

been addressed by other authors. For example, Henry Wallon thinks that

"Socialization and individualization are interconnected and condition each other"

(Wallon, quoted in H. Rodriguez, 2008, p. 78). Although this author had already

warned that the social-individual constructivist ideological polemic could find its end

in reciprocity, the link between these perspectives of the constructivist issue had not

been properly discussed: meaningful learning. Thus, the constructivist debate can be

ended if we consider that the subject, the individual, is a social being who needs

interaction to give way to his cognitive constructions at the individual level; that is, we

start from a subjective level to give way to the construction of subjectivity. It is also

important to emphasize that the means of expression and interpretation of these

cognitive constructions is language, which in turn varies from one context to another.

Thus, L. Rodríguez (2008), in his book La teoría del aprendizaje significativo en la

perspectiva de la psicología cognitiva (The theory of meaningful learning in the

perspective of cognitive psychology), argues that:

The human mind operates with concepts and handles them in linguistic terms in its

thinking operations, from which it follows that the mediation of language determines

the meaningfulness of learning [...] The correlation between language and meaningful

learning is thus crucial. [The correlation between language and meaningful learning is

therefore crucial. (p. 17) To summarize a little, language, as a means of

communication, is essential for all kinds of learning, including meaningful learning.

Hence, without neglecting the importance of the material selected and the disposition

of the student, it is considered a determining factor in the meaningfulness of learning.

It is well known that within constructivist theories there is an intellectual division as

to the position that is exercised within this theory. The dichotomy to which reference

is being made is that which divides the world between a social perspective and an

individual perspective without taking into account that these perspectives do not

necessarily exclude each other. Therefore, their relationship, rather than being

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

problematic, should be complementary; even more so when we are talking about

education. To summarize the matter a little, the teacher must strive to understand the

previous knowledge of his students (subsumers), knowledge acquired or developed

thanks to daily life, base his instruction on these subsumers, and accompany the

student in the process in which he "gives birth" (construction of a new idea). That is

what teaching is, it is the art of making light (H. Rodríguez, 2008). The point is that

this process of "giving birth" is carried out by the student in relation to the teacher's

knowledge, but the knowledge that results from this relationship is different both from

what the student knew before and from the teacher's knowledge itself, i.e., it is a

construction of the student's own knowledge, although it requires interaction.

It can be seen that there is an explicit and manifest relationship between the individual

and social constructivist perspectives; this link is precisely meaningful learning. In

other words, knowledge, from a holistic and integral vision of constructivist theories,

is constructed by the individual. For this reason, and taking into account the

discussion and reflections presented in this paper, it is proposed to conceive

meaningful learning as the unifying entity between social and individual

constructivism. The end of the individual - social constructivist dichotomy. In spite of

the profound discussion that has been established among the theories and authors

presented, there are still some lines of reflection that may well merit further studies

or, at least, other texts based on research. For example, to what extent can the logical

meaning of the material contribute to meaningful learning, what are the possibilities

in the case where the material is presented as logically meaningful but the student,

consciously or not, learns repetitively, and even, returning to one of the previously

raised questions, what about the case where the student decides to learn meaningfully

but his intellectual or cognitive maturity obstructs the process? Each of these

questions represents a possible situation whose answer could vary from one context to

another, ergo, we are in favor of the systematization and continuous and rigorous

reflection of the teaching practice, there are the real answers to these questions.

References

Álvarez-Correa, A. A. (2019). Writing: the

starting point for the re-formulation of

new social norms. Revista Sinergia(6),

160-172. Retrieved from

http://sinergia.colmayor.edu.co/ojs/ind

ex.php/Revistasinergia/article/view/90

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

Álvarez-Correa, A. A., Mejía-Castro, A. F., &

Quintero-Arubla, S. A. (2020). The 'what

for' before the 'how': a qualitative turn on

the epistemology of mathematics. Revista

Sinergia, 1(7), 195-204. Retrieved from

http://sinergia.colmayor.edu.co/ojs/ind

ex.php/Revistasinergia/article/view/95

Ángel Pérez, D. A. (2011). Hermeneutics and

research methods in the social sciences.

Estudios de Filosofía(44), 9-37. Retrieved

from

https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/

estudios_de_filosofia/article/view/1263

3/11391

Araya, V., Alfaro, M., & Andonegui, M. (2007).

Constructivism: Origins and perspectives.

Laurus, 13(24), 76-92. Retrieved from

https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=

76111485004

Ausubel, D. (1983). Meaningful learning theory.

CEIF Faculties, 1, 1-10.

Barriga Arceo, F. D. (2003). Situated cognition

and strategies for meaningful learning.

Electronic Journal of Educational

Research, 5(2), 1-13. Retrieved from

http://redie.ens.uabc.mx/vol5no2/conte

nido-arceo.html

Bauman, Z. (2004). Modernidad Líquida.

Argentina: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Retrieved from

https://catedraepistemologia.files.wordp

ress.com/2009/05/modernidad-

liquida.pdf

Berman, M. (1998). All that is solid vanishes into

thin air. The experience of modernity

(10th ed.) (A. Morales Vida, Trans.)

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

Madrid: Siglo veintiuno editores.

Retrieved from

https://antroporecursos.files.wordpress.

com/2009/03/berman-m-1982-todo-lo-

solido-se-desvanece-en-el-aire-la-

experiencia-de-la-modernidad.pdf

Carraher, T., Carraher, D., & Schliemann, A.

(2002). In life ten, in school zero (7th ed.).

Mexico, D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.

Chernobilsky, L. B. (2006). The use of the

computer as an auxiliary in qualitative

data analysis. In I. Vascilachis de

Gialdino, Estrategias de investigación

cualitativa (pp. 239-273). Barcelona:

Editorial Gedisa, S.A.

Díaz-Barriga, F., & Hernández Rojas, G. (2002).

Teaching strategies for meaningful

learning. A constructivist interpretation

(2nd. ed.). México, D.F.: McGraw-Hill

Interamericana.

Elboj Saso, C., Puigdellívol Aguadé, I., Soler

Gallart, M., & Valls Carol, R. (2018).

Learning communities. Transforming

education. Barcelona: Graó.

Freire, P. (1997a). Pedagogy of autonomy. (P.

Guillermo, Trans.) Mexico D.F.,

Coyoacán, Mexico: Siglo veintiuno

editores.

Galeano Marín, M. E. (2012). Qualitative social

research strategies. El giro en la mirada.

Medellín, Colombia: La carreta editores.

Herrera, J. D. (2010). Understanding the social.

Horizonte hermenéutico de las ciencias

sociales (2nd ed.). Ediciones Ántropos.

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

Juárez Ocampo, A. F. (2015). Didactic material

and meaningful learning

[Undergraduate degree work,

Universidad Rafael Landívar,

Guatemala].

Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural

theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.),

Sociocultural theory and Second

Language Learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford,

England: Oxford University Press.

Moreira, M. A. (1997). Meaningful learning: an

underlying concept. Proceedings of the

International Meeting on Meaningful

Learning, (pp. 19-44).

Ortega Iglesias, J. M. (2017). School knowledge

and teacher's "disciplinary" knowledge:

some reflections on teacher's

participation in the construction and

teaching of content associated with school

disciplines. Folios(45), 87-102. doi:

https://doi.org/10.17227/01234870.45fo

lios87.102

Peláez, O., & Usma, J. (2017). The crucial role of

educational stakeholders in the

appropriation of Foreign Language

Education policies: a case study.

PROFILE Issues in teacher's Professional

Development, 19(2), 121-134.

doi:https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v19

n2.57215

Quintero, S. R., Ramírez, L. E., & Jaramillo, B.

(2016). Playful attitude and expressive

languages in early childhood. Revista

Virtual Universidad Católica del

Norte(48), 155-170. Retrieved from

http://34.231.144.216/index.php/Revist

aUCN/article/view/766

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

Rodríguez Palmero, L. (2008). The theory of

meaningful learning. In L. Rodríguez

Palmero, La teoría del aprendizaje

significativo en la perspectiva de la

psicología cognitiva (pp. 7-45).

Barcelona: Ediciones Octaedro, S.L.

Retrieved from

https://otrasvoceseneducacion.org/archi

vos/264940#:~:text=Rese%C3%B1as-

,Libro%3A%20La%20teor%20teor%C3%

ADa%20del%20aprendizaje%20significa

tivo%20en,perspectiva%20de%20la%20

psicolog%20psicolog%20C3%ADa%20co

gnitiva&text=La%20Teor%20C3%ADa%

20del%20Aprendizaje%20Significativo%

20es.

Rodríguez Villamil, H. (2008). From

constructivism to constructionism:

educational implications. Journal of

Education and Social Development, 2(1),

71-89.

doi:https://doi.org/10.18359/reds.710

Silva Córdova, R. (2012). Teaching physics

through meaningful and cooperative

learning in Blended Learning [Doctoral

Thesis, University of Burgos]. Revista De

Enseñanza De La Física,,, 24(2).

Retrieved from

https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/re

vistaEF/article/view/8174

Usma, J., & Peláez, O. (2017). Teacher

autonomy: From the conventional

promotion of independent learning to the

critical appropriation of language

policies. In C. Nicolaides, & W. Magno e

Silva (Eds.), Innovations and challenges

in applied linguistics and learner

Meaningful learning: the end of the social and individual constructivist dichotomy?

Vol 3 - No 1 January - June e-ISSN 2745-1194 Pages 47-67

autonomy (pp. 43-62). Campinas: SP:

Pontes Editores.

Valencia, M. (2013). Language policy and the

manufacturing of consent for foreign

intervention in Colombia. Profile: Issues

in Teachers' Professional Development,

15(1), 27-43. Retrieved 09 2022, from

https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=

169226229004

Vygotsky, L. S. (1995). Thought and language.

Theory of the cultural development of

psychic functions (M. M. Rotger, Trans.)

Ediciones Fausto.