So clear accent and comprehensive so easily can completely figure out in the understanding! From Bangladesh the so-called poor country!!! Hats-off 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Thank you so much for such an easy explanation! I have started the university in the UK and English is not my first language. It is so hard to understand academic literature for me.. your video has made it so clear to me of what constructionism and positivism is. I cannot thank you enough ❤
I watch this on my laptop, and then right after I went to my mobile and subscribed and liked! A great video and it allowed me to understand constructivism, thank you very much!
Adding to your analogy between knowledge and the ocean. Nobody studies the same ocean, because each of us reflects our unique image on to the ocean; we each add our individuality to it. So knowledge has a subjective dimension, in opposition to positivism.
Life-saver! I and my group members have scrambled through our brains as undergrads to understand qualitative research and write a research proposal when I came across your videos. I appreciate the real-life examples, and how you make the content so relatable to laypeople. Thank you for your work. 👏
Thanks for the video, very helpful to have some practical examples. How would you differentiate between constructionism and constructivism? I know they are very closely related but I’m also aware there are differences, but I’m struggling with what they are. Many thanks.
Thanks for this knowledge. I had read several books, journals and videos. But I had completely failed to understand anything. But with this video I feel like I have a Phd in constructivism.
Thank you so much for the video, it's for helpful to me especially that I have chosen to use qualitative research methods. On epistemology I needed to hear more examples apart from interviews. Thank you
Hello from Brazil! Excelent explanation! I liked the analogy between the globe and the ocean! It was perfect! Another examples of the research in a perspective of construtivism can be etnography and participatory research. Thanks a lot for the video!
Thank you so much for this. In my own research it is often easy to get caught up in the very philosophical discussions surrounding research paradigms. This video has helped me bring those discussions back to their practical implications for my research.
Thank you very much for all your valuable insights. I am sure now I understand what Constructivism stands for. Could you please briefly enlighten me on the difference between Constructivism and Interpretativism ? I know they are a bit similar but not the same and it is so confusing
I am not even sure myself, to be honest, but I feel like maybe interpretivism is broader and more inclusive - however, as I said, I am not sure so I don't want to pretend that I do :)
thankyou....it would be wonderful if you could explain all three IR mein theories using a comparative method yet in a way that we don't get them mixed up....i dont know if its possible but it would be worth the try
This is a difficult question, but the key difference, I think, is that constructivism focuses on personal experiences/the role of an individual in constructing knowledge, and social constructivism is concerned more with social interactions and a wider culture
thank you very much, this was awesome. However, now I am really confused between this paradigm and interpretivism. Could you please according to your knowledge in. both what is the differences?
Great vid! Could one argue that constructivist epistemology would also be concerned with quantitative research that focused on the same principles? (ideas, beliefs, social networks etc themselves, not just qualitative)
@@qualitativeresearcher In what sense? Polling data would be an example of a method...gauging ideas/beliefs of individuals and organizations of individuals would it not?
Dr. Kriukow, clearly understood but still I have faced problem during the writing. I am writing on constructivism applying onto, epistemology and methodological review. Do you have any example of such writings.
So, I understand how a research sit-down interview is co-constructive. But, how about paper based questionnaires? One question which says 'Rate this idea (whatever it may be) from 1-5' or a question which says 'What is your weight?'. The weight question is 100% positivist, but what about the 'rate this idea' - it's more a feeling. How does the 1-5 question fit into your model? Is the researcher getting involved in setting a constructivist question since it doesn't have a definitive answer measurable by a set method? Thanks for the video! It is very good.
I'd lie if I said I know the answer! :) But I have a feeling that, if I understood what you mean correctly, if the different aspects of your study seem to indicate potentially different worldviews (a similar case is when you have 2 different methods in the study - one is a very Qualitative and subjective one, the other one is very objective, Scientific and quantitative), you may either argue that your worldview is pragmatism (my preferred scenario) or that you are switching between the worldviews (a common idea, but I do not buy it) - I do have a video about philosophies and worldviews in mixed methods research, perhaps it will be helpful!
@@qualitativeresearcher Thanks for the reply, I sometimes think there should be 'clean' answers to these problems, but I have to accept that these ideas are very hard (!) to pin down directly.
Hi, I'm Conductinga qualititive research (Phd dissrtation) using ( constructivism and interpretivism paradigms), and I'm trying to understand the historcal background of these two paradigms in way to use them as a research method, I looked through GoogleScholer and I found some helpful articls , but still confused about it..
Great channel and video! I was curious how you would respond to this: Constructivists seem to equivocate perceiving reality with reality as such. Why say ‘reality’ is fundamentally limited (or reduced) to what we know or perceive? Why not just say we have limited knowledge or limited experience of a greater reality? Constructivists seem to be putting the cart before the horse.
Great (and Difficult!) question, and it really sums up some points that I made in another video in which I talk about positivism and constructivism. What usually happens in practice is that our beliefs are a combination of assumptions from such "extreme" worldviews as constructivism and positivism, otherwise it would be difficult to even start thinking about the world. E.g. why bother researching Anything if Everything is so subjective, and just a product of our own views? To say, on the other hand, that "we have limited knowledge of greater reality", as you said, would in fact sound like something a positivist would say - because they believe there is a Greater Reality in the first place, and our goal is to explore it (unlike the "hardcore constructivists" who will argue that there is no such thing, because we are the ones who are constantly contructing the reality). I must say that my best advice is just not to think too much about these things, as just thinking about this gives me a headache :P
Would you say its possible to have a deductive TA design, supported by a constructivist position? IE: Data led coding framework, but, a flexibility to explore lived reality within that framework? (and thank you so much for your work! Its so helpful!)
Hey Grace I’m writing up my honours thesis and currently using a inductive TA under constructionist narrative analysis. It’s a bit different from constructivist but it works very well for me. Perhaps because I’m using story completion methods ☺️ Hope this sheds some light!
Consider the statements below and choose the appropriate combination in the options (a-d) given on the Pillars of Constructivism. 1. Regulative norms order and constrain behavior. 2. Constitutive norms create new actors, interests or categories of inaction. 3. Prescriptive norms prescribe good and bad norms. 4. Norms evolve. A. 1 and 2 are both false. B. 2 and 3 are both false. C. 3 and 4 are both false. D. none of the above. Can you please help me answer this question
Brilliant presentation and the most simplistically ('idiot's guide') put together and delivered explanation of SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM. After have read other literature and watched videos on the same and related topic, yours by a long way stands out as the most easily and logically and practically understandable presentation of SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM, e.g., linking this concept to the natural cognitive human abilities and distinguishing between the ontology and epistemology of Social Constructivism. I am much more confident now to proceed with the next step of my Masters research. Please confirm; Are the terms Constructivism and Constructionism synonymous, in a research context ? Thapelo Lehasa, Johannesburg, South Africa. Am I correct in saying your surname is Polish ?
Thank you I am very flattered at how useful you found my explanation to be. I must admit however, that I am myself a bit confused as to the constructivism vs constructionism dichotomy, and I do Not think they are the same - you will need to read up on this however, I'm not going to pretend that I have all the answers, as I do not. My surname is actually russian, as I have russian roots, but my first name is Polish (although they also have such name in Russia). I am, by citizenship, Polish. Greetings from an unusually hot Scotland (this is where I live) to beautiful and vibrant Johannesburg that I plan to visit one day, although never been :)
well spotted! :) There are many more, I am a big fan of whisky. Mainly Scotch, but I love Jameson's smooth taste (although this one was not as good, this one is a stout edition)
This is essentially impossible to understand until it isn't. constructivism = building your own cave of subjectivity. Building Plato's Cave. It's like enforcing Aristotelianism. It is. Our beliefs anchor our perceptions (our reality filters) outside of objective, event based reality. 'Multiple realities' is just multiplicity. It's the tension that exists between each of our existential caves. We each have a different understanding of conflict and contradiction, and that in itself is the tension from which all potential energy is transferred. Multiplicity is just reflections of you. Nothing exists without contradiction. The very first contradiction (The Big Bang) was and is the conflict between 'I Am' (gravity/compression/coherence/negentropy), and 'I Am Not' (chaos/expansion/convolution/entropy). 'All the things', are just various conflicts and resolutions, over and over again, which is just an algorithmic reduction towards an event horizon where there is probably a separation between those who 'understand', and those who don't. Crazy, hey? I know. I almost feel like this should come with an apology both because of how hard to understand it is, and because it is both true, and untrue (an abstraction).
Visit my website and explore the different ways in which I can support you and your study! drkriukow.com/my-services/
So clear accent and comprehensive so easily can completely figure out in the understanding! From Bangladesh the so-called poor country!!! Hats-off 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Thank you !Sending my love to you and Bangladesh!
@@qualitativeresearcher You are most welcome! 🥰🥰
You are a life saver. How I was floating in that ocean you showed, you saved me. Thank you.
Thank you so much for such an easy explanation! I have started the university in the UK and English is not my first language. It is so hard to understand academic literature for me.. your video has made it so clear to me of what constructionism and positivism is. I cannot thank you enough ❤
Glad it was helpful! thank you for sharing, I am really glad that I could help!
I can just cry from gratitude! I am now nearer in completing this research paper. Thank you for clarity.
You got this! :)
You have helped me so much in my PhD journey thanks you!!!!
I'm so glad! Thank you for taking the time to share it!
I watch this on my laptop, and then right after I went to my mobile and subscribed and liked!
A great video and it allowed me to understand constructivism, thank you very much!
Glad that you liked it, and thanks for subscribing! :)
Adding to your analogy between knowledge and the ocean. Nobody studies the same ocean, because each of us reflects our unique image on to the ocean; we each add our individuality to it. So knowledge has a subjective dimension, in opposition to positivism.
Love this, thank you!
Life-saver! I and my group members have scrambled through our brains as undergrads to understand qualitative research and write a research proposal when I came across your videos. I appreciate the real-life examples, and how you make the content so relatable to laypeople. Thank you for your work. 👏
Excellent! Glad that I could help and thank you for sharing this with me !
Thanks for the video, very helpful to have some practical examples. How would you differentiate between constructionism and constructivism? I know they are very closely related but I’m also aware there are differences, but I’m struggling with what they are. Many thanks.
Thanks for this knowledge. I had read several books, journals and videos. But I had completely failed to understand anything. But with this video I feel like I have a Phd in constructivism.
LOL, you're welcome :) Glad that I could help!
Very informative with relevant practical examples
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks so much Dr. Kriukow. Very helpful indeed.
Thank you for the clear and concise definitions.
You're very welcome!
Dr you explain this type very well.
Thank you!
Thanks, very useful in helping me understand constructivism.
You are welcome!
Hai Dr Kriukow, I lkie the way you explain the constructivism. well done doc and lots of thanks
Thank you! Such feedback means a lot to me
Can you explain the difference between social constructionism and constructivism as you’ve just explained?
Thankyou so much Doctor, it's indeed shading some light.
Thank you so much for the video, it's for helpful to me especially that I have chosen to use qualitative research methods. On epistemology I needed to hear more examples apart from interviews. Thank you
You're very welcome!
Thank you for clear my confusion 🙏
Happy to help!
thank you so much Dr.Kriukow
You're most welcome!
Hello from Brazil! Excelent explanation! I liked the analogy between the globe and the ocean! It was perfect! Another examples of the research in a perspective of construtivism can be etnography and participatory research. Thanks a lot for the video!
Thank you so much for this. In my own research it is often easy to get caught up in the very philosophical discussions surrounding research paradigms. This video has helped me bring those discussions back to their practical implications for my research.
happy to hear that Hermine!
Thank you!!! it was perfect. I was a little stuck in the epistemological part and you def helped me. I appreciate thework you have put into this.
Thank you for taking the time to share this feedback - I'm really glad I could help!
Great video, thanks for the simplicity and break down!
Thank you very much for all your valuable insights. I am sure now I understand what Constructivism stands for. Could you please briefly enlighten me on the difference between Constructivism and Interpretativism ? I know they are a bit similar but not the same and it is so confusing
I am not even sure myself, to be honest, but I feel like maybe interpretivism is broader and more inclusive - however, as I said, I am not sure so I don't want to pretend that I do :)
Perfect explanation
Perfect explanation, many thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it!
thank you, now interested in pragmatism... :)
Professor.... JD whisky behind you and the lecture both are good
Great explanation. I need some of the Jameson in the background...lol
Thank you for breaking it down so simply!
thankyou....it would be wonderful if you could explain all three IR mein theories using a comparative method yet in a way that we don't get them mixed up....i dont know if its possible but it would be worth the try
Ocean analogy is very helpful 👌
Thank you!
So helpful! Thanks, Doc. :)
Glad it was helpful!
I like the ocean analogy it helps thank you.
Thank you very much for the video. My idea is now crystal clear. This video has helped me to decide my research design.
Thank you I'm glad I managed to explain what constructivism is :)
This is an excellent explanation. Thank you for the upload!
Glad you enjoyed it!
your video helped me alot :-) can you please mention all references, from where did you get all this knowledge?
thank you for sharing. could you please tell the difference between constructivism and constructionism?
This is a difficult question, but the key difference, I think, is that constructivism focuses on personal experiences/the role of an individual in constructing knowledge, and social constructivism is concerned more with social interactions and a wider culture
Good presentation
Thank you
thank you very much, this was awesome. However, now I am really confused between this paradigm and interpretivism. Could you please according to your knowledge in. both what is the differences?
This is excellent! Thank you!
You're very welcome!
what is the difference between constructivism and constructionism
very helpful thank you for this
Thank you this was very helpful
Glad it was helpful! And thank you for taking the time to share this with me
your video is so good, Now i clearly understand this concept, thanks a lot
Glad I could help!
Thaaaaaank you very much! The best explanation ever.
Thank you I have a better understanding of this topic
Glad to hear that! Well done!
Great vid! Could one argue that constructivist epistemology would also be concerned with quantitative research that focused on the same principles? (ideas, beliefs, social networks etc themselves, not just qualitative)
Not sure. It probably is possible, but would be quite difficult !
@@qualitativeresearcher In what sense? Polling data would be an example of a method...gauging ideas/beliefs of individuals and organizations of individuals would it not?
Thanks for making this easy.
Dr. Kriukow, clearly understood but still I have faced problem during the writing. I am writing on constructivism applying onto, epistemology and methodological review. Do you have any example of such writings.
Thanks! Succinct and thoughtful.
Glad you enjoyed it!
This has helped me so much. Thank you!!!!!
So, I understand how a research sit-down interview is co-constructive. But, how about paper based questionnaires? One question which says 'Rate this idea (whatever it may be) from 1-5' or a question which says 'What is your weight?'. The weight question is 100% positivist, but what about the 'rate this idea' - it's more a feeling. How does the 1-5 question fit into your model? Is the researcher getting involved in setting a constructivist question since it doesn't have a definitive answer measurable by a set method?
Thanks for the video! It is very good.
I'd lie if I said I know the answer! :) But I have a feeling that, if I understood what you mean correctly, if the different aspects of your study seem to indicate potentially different worldviews (a similar case is when you have 2 different methods in the study - one is a very Qualitative and subjective one, the other one is very objective, Scientific and quantitative), you may either argue that your worldview is pragmatism (my preferred scenario) or that you are switching between the worldviews (a common idea, but I do not buy it) - I do have a video about philosophies and worldviews in mixed methods research, perhaps it will be helpful!
@@qualitativeresearcher Thanks for the reply, I sometimes think there should be 'clean' answers to these problems, but I have to accept that these ideas are very hard (!) to pin down directly.
Hi, I'm Conductinga qualititive research (Phd dissrtation) using ( constructivism and interpretivism paradigms), and I'm trying to understand the historcal background of these two paradigms in way to use them as a research method, I looked through GoogleScholer and I found some helpful articls , but still confused about it..
Great work!
Thank you!
Well explained. Thank you so much!
omg thank you so much; you've helped me so much
You are so welcome!
Great channel and video! I was curious how you would respond to this: Constructivists seem to equivocate perceiving reality with reality as such. Why say ‘reality’ is fundamentally limited (or reduced) to what we know or perceive? Why not just say we have limited knowledge or limited experience of a greater reality? Constructivists seem to be putting the cart before the horse.
Great (and Difficult!) question, and it really sums up some points that I made in another video in which I talk about positivism and constructivism. What usually happens in practice is that our beliefs are a combination of assumptions from such "extreme" worldviews as constructivism and positivism, otherwise it would be difficult to even start thinking about the world. E.g. why bother researching Anything if Everything is so subjective, and just a product of our own views? To say, on the other hand, that "we have limited knowledge of greater reality", as you said, would in fact sound like something a positivist would say - because they believe there is a Greater Reality in the first place, and our goal is to explore it (unlike the "hardcore constructivists" who will argue that there is no such thing, because we are the ones who are constantly contructing the reality). I must say that my best advice is just not to think too much about these things, as just thinking about this gives me a headache :P
@@qualitativeresearcher Ha, Thanks for the response!
I like your metaphor
This is so helpful. Thanks you.
Glad it was helpful! and I subscribed to your channel :) Looks interesting
This was very helpful!
Glad you think so!
Excellent!
Thank you so much! This is very useful! Greetings from Calgary!
Canada is one of my dream countries to live in ! :)
How would you differentiate with constructionism
Thank you so much.
Always welcome
Would you say its possible to have a deductive TA design, supported by a constructivist position? IE: Data led coding framework, but, a flexibility to explore lived reality within that framework? (and thank you so much for your work! Its so helpful!)
Hey Grace
I’m writing up my honours thesis and currently using a inductive TA under constructionist narrative analysis. It’s a bit different from constructivist but it works very well for me. Perhaps because I’m using story completion methods ☺️ Hope this sheds some light!
Do you offer private tuition?
Consider the statements below and choose the appropriate combination in the options (a-d) given on the Pillars of Constructivism. 1. Regulative norms order and constrain behavior. 2. Constitutive norms create new actors, interests or categories of inaction. 3. Prescriptive norms prescribe good and bad norms. 4. Norms evolve.
A. 1 and 2 are both false.
B. 2 and 3 are both false.
C. 3 and 4 are both false.
D. none of the above.
Can you please help me answer this question
Thank you
brilliant! thank you
Thank you.
You're welcome!
So helpful thank you!!
This was just wonderful !!!! Thank you so much!
Thank you !
Perfect!
Thank you!
it was so helpful
Glad to hear that!
I love your content
Thank you!
Brilliant presentation and the most simplistically ('idiot's guide') put together and delivered explanation of SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM. After have read other literature and watched videos on the same and related topic, yours by a long way stands out as the most easily and logically and practically understandable presentation of SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM, e.g., linking this concept to the natural cognitive human abilities and distinguishing between the ontology and epistemology of Social Constructivism. I am much more confident now to proceed with the next step of my Masters research. Please confirm; Are the terms Constructivism and Constructionism synonymous, in a research context ? Thapelo Lehasa, Johannesburg, South Africa. Am I correct in saying your surname is Polish ?
Thank you I am very flattered at how useful you found my explanation to be. I must admit however, that I am myself a bit confused as to the constructivism vs constructionism dichotomy, and I do Not think they are the same - you will need to read up on this however, I'm not going to pretend that I have all the answers, as I do not. My surname is actually russian, as I have russian roots, but my first name is Polish (although they also have such name in Russia). I am, by citizenship, Polish. Greetings from an unusually hot Scotland (this is where I live) to beautiful and vibrant Johannesburg that I plan to visit one day, although never been :)
thank you for this video!!
Reality is social. Actuality is physical/quantum.
I came for the constructivism, but I stayed for the Jamison in the background
well spotted! :) There are many more, I am a big fan of whisky. Mainly Scotch, but I love Jameson's smooth taste (although this one was not as good, this one is a stout edition)
I don't understand the phrase "create reality". Isn't "reality" different from what we learn and perceive?
Whether it is or not would be exactly one of the questions on which constructivists would disagree with positivists :)
perfect
Thank you for the video ! Its helpful ! But i still confused about interpretivsm / constructivism ... i found they are very similar 😂😂😂😂
This is essentially impossible to understand until it isn't. constructivism = building your own cave of subjectivity. Building Plato's Cave. It's like enforcing Aristotelianism. It is. Our beliefs anchor our perceptions (our reality filters) outside of objective, event based reality. 'Multiple realities' is just multiplicity. It's the tension that exists between each of our existential caves. We each have a different understanding of conflict and contradiction, and that in itself is the tension from which all potential energy is transferred. Multiplicity is just reflections of you. Nothing exists without contradiction. The very first contradiction (The Big Bang) was and is the conflict between 'I Am' (gravity/compression/coherence/negentropy), and 'I Am Not' (chaos/expansion/convolution/entropy). 'All the things', are just various conflicts and resolutions, over and over again, which is just an algorithmic reduction towards an event horizon where there is probably a separation between those who 'understand', and those who don't.
Crazy, hey? I know. I almost feel like this should come with an apology both because of how hard to understand it is, and because it is both true, and untrue (an abstraction).
Constructivism is what happens when you start discussing politics after hitting a blunt.
Excellent explanation though.
Good presentation
Thank you