CFI Blog post #1

Epistemology: Positivist vs Constructivist

Now, before I go off on the differences between positivists and constructionists, let me explain what an epistemology is.

Epistemology is essentially the study of knowledge.  It attempts to answer what knowledge is and how we receive it.  For the sake of this blog post I'll divide it into two separate forms, Positivist and Constructivist.  My purpose in this blog is to give my opinions on Flight instructing, and so I'll apply these two forms into aviation, and teaching/learning how to fly. 

Positivist learning focuses on learning actual facts, and using rote memorization to ingrain something into the mind.  Personally I find positivist learning to be useful in some situations, but there is a lack of understanding. When I first learned how to fly an airplane I was taught what things were, but not really why.  This was helpful at the beginning, but in order to operate in a safer way I needed to understand why things worked, and why the airplane behaved the way it did. For example, I was taught that the airplane stalled when I was going slower, and when the angle of attack of the wing exceeded the critical angle.  However, I didn't know how or why that happened.

Constructivist learning focuses on the way things are learned, with more emphasis on why and how something happens.  For example, while working on my commercial license I learned how aerodynamics worked, and now I understand that an airplane can stall at any airspeed, and an increase in bank, or load factor can drastically raise the stall speed.

I feel like the constructive learning method is much better because the motivation included is much better.  I work as a manager at a carpentry mill and have found that when I teach why something is the way it is, my fellow employees are more efficient and I don't have to remind them as often.  Constructivist learning is what I feel is better.