In Molière's Bourgeois Gentilhomme, the 'nouveau riche' Jourdain, who wants nothing more than to be accepted into the company of the French Aristocracy, makes an important discovery: "I am speaking prose! I have always spoken prose! I have spoken prose throughout my whole life!". Jourdain's sudden realization highlights the notion that not all our actions are necessarily directly guided by an overt knowledge of the reasoning behind them. In the same way, educators often adopt a particular approach or method without necessarily having purposely considered the theory or philosophy that underpins the approach. Intuition, successful experiences, observations: these factors play an important role in influencing the behaviour of teachers and, no doubt, often dictate their practice.

The fact that practice can relate to theory but not be directly or knowingly guided by it is evidence of the complexity of the relationship between the two. It is likely that the more general the theory, the more easily it may translate either directly or indirectly into practice. In this sense, constructivism lends itself well to practice. It has been interpreted, refashioned and reformulated into at least seven different forms. Combinations of these forms such as radical and social are inspired by or relate to the writings and theories of Vygotsky, Piaget, von Glasersfeld, Varela, Wittgenstein, & Bateson to mention but a few. Constructivism thus provides a broad base for interpretation and for practice.

Can constructivism effectively translate into a learning theory from an epistemology, and from a learning theory to practice? Such is the question that this inquiry considered. Five different projects and environments were analyzed with a view to determining if, and in what ways, they accommodated or supported constructivist characteristics and principles of learning. Although the projects were described by their creators as constructivist, it is not clear whether or not they were directly conceived with and designed by constructivist principles. What is clear, however, is that the projects do indeed provide a direct link between theories of knowledge, on one hand, and teaching and learning practices on the other. In each case, constructivist characteristics were clearly evident and, in fact, provided the back bone for and dictated the types of activities, roles and relationships, resources, and types of thinking involved in each project or environment.

The checklist was not sufficiently sophisticated to allow for descriptions of the degrees to which given characteristics might be supported. Certain projects emphasized or favoured particular characteristics over others. Knowledge construction was a pivotal force in each activity. Collaborative knowledge building served as an important feature for all projects as well. Other characteristics such as problem-solving, student-directed learning and apprenticeship learning were favoured approaches. Exploratory learning, scaffolding and metacognition appeared from the observations to receive varying degrees of emphasis depending on the project or environment. In general, they served as secondary features and not specifically as defining characteristics.

The inquiry provided interesting insights into the different interpretations of and ways in which the various characteristics were supported. Scaffolding was supported differently in each of the five projects that were considered. Accommodation for metacognition and multiple perspectives also varied considerably from project to project. Many of the characteristics were interrelated in such a way that it was unlikely to see support for one and not for the other. 'Learner control', 'student-directed goals', and 'teachers as coaches' serve as examples of a group of characteristics which, in many ways, depend on, or support each other. For example, 'learner control' dictates or assumes that the corresponding teacher's role will be that of a facilitator, aide or guide.

Application of the checklist served as a means to compare the variety of ways in which constructivism could be both interpreted and translated into practice. While this inquiry considered only five projects, no doubt there are many others that are inspired by a constructivist philosophy either overtly or indirectly. No doubt there are many teachers who, without knowing of the term, without having been informed of the theory, without following a prescriptive design, are providing the students in their care with opportunities for constructivist learning. As von Glasersfeld (1995) comments:

Constructivism does not claim to have made earth-shaking inventions in the area of education; it merely claims to provide a solid conceptual basis for some of the things that, until now, inspired teachers had to do without theoretical foundation.

Von Glasersfeld's musings remind us that theory and practice exhibit a curious interplay which is ofttimes unpredictable and, sometimes, unexplainable. His comments remind us as well that constructivism is more than a theory of learning. It is a way of looking at the world that is broad enough to allow for multiple interpretations and yet, defined sufficiently to allow for a perspective that can explain complex and abstract phenomenon and which can guide our actions. We tend to take for granted and accept unquestioningly the use of terms such as 'true', 'real', 'worlds'. Consideration of the complexities behind these everyday words seems far removed from the daily practice of the classroom and more like the fodder of philosophers such as...Socrates.

Constructivism reminds us that these are not only important philosophical notions. On the contrary, they can significantly affect how we see the world and, more importantly, how we behave in it. Perhaps an important challenge for educational reform is to begin to question and come to a greater understanding of the philosophy, theory and epistemology that presently informs educational practice. Like Molière's Jourdain, understanding what our behaviours and practices mean can ofttimes be both revealing, and, hopefully, useful.