Contemporary education systems are increasingly characterized by hybridity, digital mediation, linguistic plurality, and complex forms of learner–teacher interaction. Within this evolving context, classical theories of learning, particularly social constructivism and sociocultural theory, require renewed theoretical integration and empirical reinterpretation. This article develops an extensive, theory-driven investigation into how learning, interaction, assessment, and meaning-making operate in both physical and virtual learning environments when viewed through a constructivist and sociocultural lens. Drawing strictly on the provided corpus of foundational and contemporary references, the study synthesizes Vygotskian sociocultural theory, Piagetian constructivism, modern constructivist learning design, feedback and assessment theory, and emerging perspectives on online and blended learning.

The article argues that learning is not merely the internal acquisition of knowledge but a socially mediated, dialogically structured, and culturally embedded process that is dynamically regulated through interaction, feedback, and shared activity. In this view, classrooms—whether face-to-face, virtual, or hybrid—are not delivery systems for information but ecosystems of meaning construction in which learners negotiate understanding through discourse, tools, and collaborative activity. The paper places particular emphasis on the concept of co-regulation, showing how assessment, feedback, and interaction serve as mechanisms through which learners and teachers jointly shape cognitive development. Grounded in the work of Vygotsky, Kohn, Andrade and Brookhart, Black and Wiliam, and others, the analysis demonstrates that learning is fundamentally relational and dialogical.

Methodologically, the study adopts a qualitative theoretical synthesis approach, integrating conceptual frameworks from social constructivism, sociocultural theory, and constructivist instructional design to interpret patterns of learning interaction described in the literature. Rather than treating digital and physical learning spaces as fundamentally different, the article conceptualizes them as variations of sociocultural activity systems, each with distinct affordances and constraints. Research on virtual classrooms and blended learning environments is interpreted through this theoretical lens to show how presence, dialogue, and guided participation function in technologically mediated contexts.

The findings indicate that effective learning environments—whether traditional or digital—are characterized by shared goals, meaningful tasks, dialogic feedback, and structured opportunities for collaborative problem-solving. The analysis further reveals that assessment is not an external measure imposed on learners but a central mechanism of learning itself, enabling reflection, self-regulation, and social negotiation of standards. By integrating constructivist and sociocultural perspectives, the article proposes a unified theoretical framework for understanding learning, teaching, and assessment in contemporary education.

The discussion elaborates the implications of this framework for curriculum design, teacher practice, and educational policy. It highlights the limitations of transmissive models of teaching and advocates for guided, dialogical, and project-based approaches that align with how humans learn in social contexts. The article concludes by suggesting that future research and practice must continue to bridge theory and pedagogy, ensuring that digital innovation serves not to mechanize learning but to deepen its human, relational, and meaning-making dimensions.

Social constructivism, sociocultural theory, co-regulation, digital learning

Adam, S. F. (2006). An introduction to learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature, function and position of learning outcomes in the creation of the European Higher Education Area.

Ajjawi, R., & Boud, D. (2018). Examining the nature and effects of feedback dialogue. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1106–1119.

Akpan, V. I., Igwe, U. A., Mpamah, I. B., & Okoro, C. O. (2020). Social constructivism: Implications on teaching and learning. British Journal of Education, 8(8), 49–56.

Alias, M., Lashari, T. A., Akasah, Z. A., & Kesot, M. J. (2014). Translating theory into practice: Integrating the affective and cognitive learning dimensions for effective instruction in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 39(2), 212–232.

Andrade, H. L., & Brookhart, S. M. (2020). Classroom assessment as the co-regulation of learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 350–372.

Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D. J., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction (pp. 17–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper’s World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21–23.

Blaine, A. M. (2019). Interaction and presence in the virtual classroom: An analysis of the perceptions of students and teachers in online and blended Advanced Placement courses. Computers & Education, 132, 31–43.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(6), 551–575.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Curriculum Development.

Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32.

Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 250–256.

Darnon, C., Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2006). Buts de performance et de maîtrise et interactions sociales entre étudiants. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 155, 35–44.

Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. New York: Minton.

Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Erbil, D. G. (2020). A review of flipped classroom and cooperative learning method within the context of Vygotsky theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1157.

Guillemette, F. (2020). Moving from the transmissive model to a guided learning model. Issues and Society, 7, 42–73.

Hernáiz-Pérez, M., Álvarez-Hornos, J., Badia, J. D., Giménez, J. B., Robles, Á., Ruano, V., & San-Valero, P. (2021). Contextualized project-based learning for training chemical engineers in graphic expression. Education for Chemical Engineers, 34.

Honebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 11–24). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.

Jonassen, D. (1991). Objectivism vs constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5–13.

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, April, 34–37.

Kohn, K. (2018). English: A social constructivist perspective on ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 7(1), 1–24.

Larochelle, M., Bednarz, N., & Garrison, J. (Eds.). (1999). Constructivism and education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(1), 93–99.

Leclerc, M. (2007). Project-based learning. Sainte-Foy: Presses de l’Université du Québec.

Leiber, T. (2022). Justifying, contextualizing, and operationalizing performance indicators of learning and teaching. Quality in Higher Education, 28(2), 120–140.

Oliver, K. M. (2000). Methods for developing constructivist learning on the web. Educational Technology, 40(6).

Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5–12.

Piaget, J. (1980). The psychogenesis of knowledge and its epistemological significance. In M. Piattelli-Palmarini (Ed.), Language and learning (pp. 23–34). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.