Does constructivism promote academic excellence?

I have been giving this a lot of thought recently.  I am just starting out on this path to become an educator, and as such have no classroom experience with which to realistically base my answer - all I can offer is my opinion on the matter.  If we judge academic excellence by test scores, then I suppose my answer would be no.  The constructivist approach with its emphasis on building knowledge through exploration and democratic cooperation does not lend itself to the rigors of testing.  I don’t see how a student could possibly learn all the things necessary to achieve high or even passing scores on tests given that constructivism seems such a slow process compared to lectures and text followed by memorization.  Allowing students to follow their own inclination, even if responsibly directed by a skilled teacher, seems like it would result in some of the “drier” subjects like math and history to be neglected.

I understand why teachers are reluctant to make the change from a more traditional approach to a progressive one.  It involves a lot more effort on the part of the teacher to find the best way to steer learning in the classroom.  A lot more planning has to go into the lessons, and the instructor has to be adept at reading their students and responding to their questions with appropriate nudges towards the answer.  It also flies in the face of years of schooling tradition which they themselves underwent.  I know that it is difficult to conclude that your own personal education is lacking in some way.

So, by all conventional measure constructivism does not promote academic excellence.  However, I think academic excellence is what happens when knowledge is retained and can be utilized for the good of society.  I don’t remember many of the facts I learned in school.  They were put into my short-term memory, and since the knowledge wasn’t used, it faded.  Facts are not as useful without concepts to ground them.  It seems to me that maybe it is more important to have depth of knowledge rather than breadth.  I think a constructivist approach with a focus on concept formation and discovery, coupled with direct instruction for those subjects that benefit from it the most, can be a powerful tool indeed.  I don’t see it working well unless there is a fundamental change in standardized testing.   The focus on measuring a teacher’s effectiveness through test scores means that any progressive approach could result in teacher terminations.  Constructivist teaching is difficult to assess in such a simple, straight forward manner.  I don’t know how it can work unless embraced by the entire educational system, which I am learning, is very reluctant to change.  I hope to see constructivism being used in more classrooms in the future because any approach which stimulates curiosity and can be both effective and fun is a practice I want to adopt.