At present, social constructivists agree on little more than the impor
tant assumption that knowledge is a social product. Beyond this, there
is little agreement about process. Different viewpoints about what it
means to negotiate meaning and what the object of that negotiation ou
ght to be (i.e., strategies/skills versus big ideas) reflect different
assumptions about learning and the nature of truth. We examine these
assumptions by contrasting three underlying world views: mechanistic-i
nformation processing, organismic-radical constructivism, and Deweyan
contextualism or transactional realism. This third world view, we argu
e, is most consistent with idea-based social constructivism.