I didn't come up with the title but I recognized it as the right one as soon as it was proposed. It perfectly captures an important point that is sometimes lost in talk of constructionism – that any kind of learning is a profoundly creative process and should be recognized as such. You don't learn by passively storing up information in your head; you learn by constructing a personal mental model of a domain, and given the uniqueness of your own situation, that is a necessarily creative and inventive act.
I highlighted this one just because it is so resonant and compatible with less whacko forms of constructionism , like Minsky/Papert eg, or Korsgaard. Although I'm sure the construction process is pretty radically different.
Constructionism as a non-stupid replacement for the dead philosophical question of free will. That is to say, we don't have free will in the sense of somehow being apart from the causal universe – we are part of it and subject to its laws like everything else. Nonetheless, we have not just the ability but the obligation to construct the world we find ourselves in – both our mental representations of it, and the physical world itself. We are obliged to create but have a certain degree of freedom in how we do that, a freedom that is not magical or acausal.