Supporting Post-Graduates’ Skill Acquisition Using Components of Constructivism and Social Learning Theory


In order to support our post-graduates, higher education professionals are often petitioned to provide concentrated training opportunities in specific skill development to our adult learners. The question then becomes, how to support and enhance curriculum attainment within the constraints of a concentrated format? In this article, we describe our efforts to design and implement professional development workshops based on components of Constructivism and Social Learning Theory. The participants included 150 post-graduate teachers from 19 secondary and elementary schools who participated in 3-day workshops on differentiated instruction (DI) techniques. Findings indicate that the design of the workshops provided the participants with useful strategies and resources. Results from paired sample T-test yielded interesting results.

Share and Cite:

Hinshaw, R. , Burden, R. & Shriner, M. (2012). Supporting Post-Graduates’ Skill Acquisition Using Components of Constructivism and Social Learning Theory. Creative Education, 3, 874-877. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.326131.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[2] Barnett, E. (2004). Characteristics and perceived effectiveness of staff development practices in selected high schools in South Dakota (Electronic version). Educational Research Quarterly, 28, 3-18.
[3] Birman, B. F., Disimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57, 28-33.
[4] Dembo, M. H. (1994). Applying educational psychology (5th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
[5] Dingle, M., Brownell, M., Leko, M., Boardman, A., & Haager, D. (2011). Developing effective special education reading teachers: the influence of professional development, context and individual qualities. The Free Library. URL (last checked 9 September 2011). effective special education reading teachers: the…-a0251534704.
[6] Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.) (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
[7] Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1990). Educational psychology: A realistic approach (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Company.
[8] Guskey, T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8, 381-391. doi:10.1080/135406002100000512
[9] Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Constructivist learning environments on the web: Engaging students in meaningful learning. EdTech99: Educational Technology Conference and Exhibition 1999: Thinking Schools, Learning Nation. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
[10] Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Deve (ASCD).
[11] Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strike rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 14-19. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
[12] Schuman, L. (1996). Perspectives on instruction. URL (last checked 14 September 2012).
[13] Speck, M. (2002). Balanced and year-round professional development: Time and learning. Journal of National School Development Council-Catalyst for Change, 32, 17-19.
[14] Tienken, C. H., & Stonaker, L. (2007). When everyday is professional development day. Journal of Staff Development, 24, 24-29.
[15] Wormeli, R. (2007). Differentiation: From planning to practice grades 6 - 12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers, Westerville, OH: National Middles School Association.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.