Constructivism in Practice

Constructivist and constructionist learning theories are rooted in the principle that real learning occurs when learners actively construct meaning for themselves through active experience (Laureate, 2009). Constructionist learning theory suggests that this experience should result in the building of an external artifact (Laureate, 2009; Han & Bhattacharya, 2001). Although the validity of these theories has long been accepted, practical impediments have traditionally interfered with their widespread implementation. Now, digital information, communication, and collaboration tools are facilitating teachers’ ability to realize these principles in classroom instruction.


There are many ways to use computer technology to implement constructivist and constructionist learning theory in practice. Dr. Michael Orey suggests that PowerPoint can be used to create the final artifact of a project-based, constructivist lesson (Laureate, 2001). Students are given a challenging topic to address in their presentation and encounter, through their preparation, situations that create disequilibration, a state that occurs when existing schemata do not account for unexpected situations or new information. Students must then either assimilate new information into an existing schema, or create a new schema to accommodate it. Either way, because they immediately apply new knowledge or skills to the completion of a meaningful task, they are more likely to be fully engaged in the learning experience and to retain new knowledge and skills. This process is fundamental to all constructionist learning situations.

In Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology, Han and Bhattacharya (2001) describe a workshop on effective Web-based instruction in which the facilitator uses a constructionist learning model. She begins by eliciting background information about participants and their goals for the workshop. She previews activities and opens the floor for questions, asks for ideas about the topic to tap participants’ prior knowledge (which she records on a flip-chart), highlights common themes and significant points in their responses, and integrates them into a PowerPoint presentation representing the collective knowledge of the group. The then presents the PowerPoint to the group with illustrating anecdotes before introducing participants to Web-based instruction examples. When they have examined these models, she records the group’s reflections on their experiences, which they share in a whole-group debriefing. With these experiences, participants individually construct their own Web-based instruction with lists of required components to guide them. These components are learner analysis, timeframe, interface metaphor, multiple presentation modes, assessment strategies, a variety of learning tasks, and a learner centered environment. They then form groups that discuss and select plans for presentation. Presentations are followed by comments and questions from the audience and reflective discussion. The workshop is followed by ongoing online communication through participant facilitated chat sessions. Final individual projects are shared and critiqued online. This process illustrates constructionist learning theory by holding to the principle that “instruction is only effective when the learners can relate personally and take something away from it” (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001, p.2). It moves through planning, implementing, and processing phases with active participant involvement at every stage. The activity is learner-oriented, interactive, based on understanding of learners and their contexts, centers on construction of an artifact, and uses multiple presentation methods (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001).

Ideally, a constructionist learning environment uses rubrics to establish expectations, discussion of and interpretation of assignment parameters, exploration of multiple strategies for the assignment, inquiry and learning during development, presentation of work, revision and development of the idea in the project, learner collaboration, collaboration with experts, and authentic tasks to provide a meaningful context (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001). A good example of problem-based instruction that reflects these standards is the Nikron example Glazer (2001) describes, in which a group of students collaborate with stakeholders in their community in an attempt to determine whether pollution from an important local industry is responsible for recent fish kills. Students are given a personally relevant, real world problem, they formulate research questions, assign questions to groups, evaluate available information resources, devise various forms of final products to present their findings, propose and negotiate projects with their teacher and media specialist, devise methods for research, conduct research, experiment, observe, share and compare research with other teams, analyze evidence, surmise the cause of the kill, return to the hypothesis and develop a presentation, present for whole-class review, and finish with a mock trial as a final assessment of their efforts and findings. This illustrates Glazer's (2001) assertion that “learning is most meaningful and is enhanced when students face a situation in which the concept is immediately applied” (p. 2). Answers to the question come from the learners’ knowledge and experience, rather than from texts or curricula, and the learning community is an integral part of the mechanism of knowledge construction.

Glazer (2001) also suggests other types of problem-based learning projects, such as anchored instruction, in which the problem comes from a learning context such as a story, adventure, or other situation with a problem that students can resolve through inquiry. He recommends online resources such as Web quests and an online desert race simulation. In Web quests, the design includes a task or problem, a process description, resources, evaluation tools, and concluding summary and debriefing.

In Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski (2007) discuss technology enhanced activities in which students are called upon to generate and test hypotheses. In one activity, students are given a sum of money to invest. They use spreadsheet software to predict how various investment strategies will turn out over the course of thirty years. In other examples, students use probeware to examine the relationship between light and color in art, or to determine if the students’ community has acid rain. He also examines an online video game developed by a teacher that helps students discover the causes of World War II through a simulation. In each case, students are actively involved in solving a real problem or constructing an authentic product in a personally significant context.

Many online resources support and describe constructivist and constructionist learning. Edutopia: Project Learning offers several examples of project-based learning experiences. In “Immersing Students in Civic Education,” Richard Rapaport (2007) describes a project in which a class of students was called upon to propose tile designs for a real renovation project for the San Francisco Port Commission. A valuable part of their learning experience was rejection by their evaluator, urban designer Dan Hodapp. This feedback, although painful, drove home the reality of the project and communicated higher expectations than would be expected in ordinary school projects. Students revised their designs to reflect a more focused theme and eventually won approval. This first step led to the difficult discovery process of learning how to actually produce the tiles. Despite many episodes of discomfort, disequilibration, and struggle in their zones of proximal development, the team ultimately prevailed. Now every student on that team can see and show an authentic artifact of their learning experience at the city’s renovated Pier 14.

Apple Learning Interchange offers several examples of online project-based learning activities (Apple, Inc., 2008). In “March of the Monarchs,” students track the northerly migration of monarch butterflies in a project entitled Journey North, funded by the Annenberg/CPB project. Students in states visited annually by the butterflies create a digital map marking sightings to document their migration. In this complex, interdisciplinary collaborative project, student groups measure the growth of plants on which the butterflies feed, calculate the growth time of larvae, analyze weather conditions that affect the migration, observe interrelated species, explore cultural references to monarchs, study other states they pass through, explore and document their life-cycle, take and post photographs, and explore every conceivable aspect of this insect’s life. While they become experts on the monarch, they also develop expertise in many other learning disciplines, all while working collaboratively to address a locally relevant, real-world issue and create an authentic product for a wide audience.

Another interesting project on Apple Learning Interchange is the International Education and Resource Network's (iEARN) First People's Project, which involves indigenous students around the world in creating and sharing artifacts of their local cultures with the global community (Apple, Inc., 2008). Students present stories, interviews, digital photographs, poems, and artwork representing their indigenous cultures, often creating the only widely available information sources on their communities’ ways of life. They share packages with other indigenous participants around the world, providing the genuinely valuable service of preserving and sharing their cultural traditions while developing their own skills and understanding of their heritage.

Problem-based, project-based, and inquiry-based learning experiences put constructivist and constructionist learning theories into practice in ways that engage students and produce cognitive and concrete results, and digital information, communication, and collaboration tools have made these projects more accessible and practical than ever before. Making use of these opportunities, teachers can help their students develop the confidence and abilities they will need to compete, and triumph, in the twenty-first century global marketplace.



REFERENCES


Apple, Inc. (2008). Online project-based learning. Apple learning interchange. Retrieved November 24, 2009, from http://edcommunity.apple.com/ali/story.php?itemID=598&version=341&page=2

Glazer, E. (2001). Problem based instruction. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved , from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/


Han, S., and Bhattacharya, K. (2001). Constructionism, Learning by Design, and Project Based Learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved , from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Lever-Duffy, J. and McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations. In Teaching and Learning with Technology (3rd ed. pp. 2–35 ). Boston: Pearson.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Rapaport, R. (2007). Immersing students in civic education. Edutopia. Retrieved November 24, 2009, from http://www.edutopia.org/intelligent-design

My Concept Map of a William Shakespeare Virtual Field Trip

Cognitivism in Practice

Cognitive learning theory attempts to explain the processes through which new information is incorporated by learners into their existing understanding of the world (Novak & Cañas, 2008). The goal of formal education is to create experiences that facilitate this assimilation. Instructional strategies and technologies that support this purpose take many forms, but should reflect deliberate application of relevant learning theories. In Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski (2007) discuss two instructional strategies that reflect cognitive learning theory and technologies that support them.

Chapter four of Pitler et al.’s (2007) book, “Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers” examines strategies that help learners “retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (p. 73). Cues and questions offer reminders that help students recall prior knowledge in order to prepare them to connect that prior knowledge to new information in an imminent learning experience. This strategy employs Ausubel et al.’s notion that authentic learning occurs when new ideas are assimilated into the learner’s existing cognitive structure (Novak & Cañas, 2008). According to Pitler et al. (2007), Ausubel developed advance organizers to help students organize and comprehend new information, particularly when it is presented in a poorly organized context. These organizers can take many forms (expository organizers, narrative organizers, graphic organizers, cues, inferential questions, analytic questions, questions and organizers produced by skimming ahead), as long as they provide some structure to guide subsequent ordering and interpretation of content (Pitler et al., 2007). Different types of organizers are appropriate for different purposes and may reflect different learning styles or intelligences, but all should be designed to focus on important content. Organizers produce more meaningful understanding if they focus on higher-order cognitive processes—those on the upper levels of Bloom’s taxonomy such as application, analysis, evaluation, and creation—rather than lower-level thinking such as factual recall (Pitler et al., 2007). Spreadsheets, concept maps, KWL charts, and even pre-reading background development through media experiences such as film clips and virtual field trips can provide advance scaffolding for learning experiences. Concept mapping tools such as CmapTools and Inspiration are particularly well suited to help students connect prior knowledge to existing cognitive structures because of their visual representation of connections among ideas. Learners may begin constructing a concept map by recording prior knowledge about a topic and showing how ideas are interrelated, then expand the map during and after the new learning experience. This application of constructivist learning theory can be further augmented when learners work collaboratively, either locally or through the Internet. Working collaboratively, learners may augment peers’ learning experiences by providing timely assistance when in what Vygotsky called the zone of proximal development (Novak & Cañas, 2008). As learners apply newly acquired information from their short term memory to the task of constructing the concept map, it moves into their working memory and, through the experience of visually representing interrelationships among ideas, becomes connected to prior knowledge and permanently established in long-term memory (Novak & Cañas, 2008). Multimedia tools can be used in similar ways to represent relationships between prior knowledge and new information in ways that appeal to various learning styles and intelligences. Use of images in multimedia organizers, presentations, and virtual field trips using computer technology takes advantage of the benefits of combining text and images Allen Paivio referred to as dual coding (Laureate, 2009). Students can use these technologies to incorporate new information into artifacts that represent episodic, archaic, or iconic associations (Novak & Cañas, 2008). And many of the same technologies that facilitate advance organization of new information are applicable to summarizing and note-taking.

(Novak &Cañas, 2008)

Pitler et al. (2007) define summary and notetaking skills as the “ability to synthesize information and distill it into a concise new form” (p. 119). Learners summarize by eliminating extraneous and redundant data, replacing lists of specifics with set categories, and finding or generating topic sentences (Pitler et al., 2007). Computers can facilitate this process through word processing, concept mapping, presentation, information retrieval, communication, and collaboration applications. Microsoft Word is a particularly versatile tool. Students can use the auto summarize feature to condense content produced by others (perhaps to compare with their own summaries) or to check their own writing to see if their meaning is evident. Word can also be used for brainstorming, through its bullet feature, or to produce advance organizers representing various organizational frames using drawing or table generating tools. Concept mapping programs can be used to assimilate new ideas, but maps can also be exported in outline form to facilitate summarization and presentation of organized notes. Presentation tools, like PowerPoint, are a great medium for producing and sharing combination notes, especially for their capacity to integrate a variety of media (Pitler et al., 2007). Small groups collaborating on such a project may divide responsibilities for this production based on individual intelligences and learning preferences. Easy access to information, images, narratives, audio, and video resources through Internet search engines and databases can help students focus on developing and incorporating, rather than searching for, content. Communication and collaboration tools, such as blogs and wikis, allow learners to engage in reciprocal teaching, or share and collaboratively build learning artifacts based on their summaries and notes on shared learning experiences (Pitler et al., 2007).

Although the application of computer technology does not, in itself, guarantee effective learning, information and communication technologies can be used to implement cognitive learning theories to facilitate meaningful student learning.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Novak, J. D. & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Behaviorism in Practice

Although behaviorist learning theory may be unfashionable in a time when constructivism, learning styles, and multiple intelligences share the spotlight, behaviorism remains a staple of learning practice in and out of the classroom. The recognition that one cannot live on bread alone does not, after all, imply that bread should be removed from one’s diet entirely. Behaviorism, appropriately applied, is an indispensable part of educational practice because students learn when effective learning behavior is reinforced. Certain technologies can support effective operant conditioning to reinforce student effort, homework, and practice (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).


Most teachers know that students often fail to recognize the connection between effort and performance. I have frequently heard students attributing bad grades to their teachers' personal opinions of them. Only when pressed, might they admit that the reason their teachers didn’t like them was their lack of effort in class. This faulty perception of cause and effect is often deep-seated, even comforting, as it excuses the student from taking responsibility for failure. But this misconception can be remedied, if the student is confronted with undeniable evidence of the true cause and effect relationship between effort and performance. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski (2007) recommend that students use rubrics and spreadsheet software to document their efforts in class. A rubric describing levels of effort in different categories allows students to quantify their behaviors so that they may be recorded on a spreadsheet. Students can then record their performance on assessments and use the software’s graphing functions to compare their effort with their performance. This method can be effective in many curricular areas and in interdisciplinary projects. Pitler et al. argue that through “consistent and systematic exposure to teaching strategies like this one” students can “really grasp the impact that effort can have on their achievement” (p. 159). They also recommend that students use data collection tools to examine statistical evidence of this correlation on a larger scale, so that they can generalize their understanding beyond a particular classroom situation. By allowing students to clearly see the consequences of their efforts, such a system reinforces behaviors that contribute to learning and academic success.

Homework and practice are also important learning behaviors that are often undervalued by students. Again, the positive consequences of effort expended on homework and practice can be so remote that they are not immediately evident to learners. Some educational technologies, including “word processing applications, spreadsheet applications, multimedia, web resources, and communication software,” can provide the sort of programmed instruction that makes effective use of behaviorist learning theory (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009; Pitler et al., 2007, p. 189). For example, Pilter et al. (2009) point out that Microsoft Word offers students immediate feedback on their writing, amounting to a reward for students who are keeping score, with a Flesch-Kincaid grade level rating feature, and can assist them with immediately improving their “score” by offering a thesaurus feature (p. 190). This is perfectly in keeping with Skinner’s programmed instruction model (Laureate, 2009; Smith, 1999).

Pilter, et al. (2009) also describe constructivist learning projects, such as PowerPoint games, that provide immediate intrinsic rewards for their creators’ and users’ success at applying curricular knowledge and skills. Here we see that there can be synergy, rather than conflict, between behaviorism and other learning theories.

The authors recommend a number of sites that provide behaviorism-based and other learning applications:

• EDDIE Awards: www.computedgazette.com/page3.html

• BESSIE Awards: www.computedgazette.com/page11.html

• Technology & Learning’s Awards of Excellence/Readers’ Choice Awards: http://www.technlearning.com/  

• eSchoolNews Readers’ Choice Awards: www.eschoolnews.com/resources/surveys/editorial/rca/

• CodIE Awards: www.siia.net/codies  

• Discovery Education’s The Parent Channel: http://school.discovery.com/parents/reviewcorner/software/

• BattleGraph: http://sarah.lodick.com/edit/powerpoint_game/battlegraph/battlegraph.ppt

• BBC Skillswise: www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise

• National Library of Virtual Manipulatives: http://nlvm.usu.edu/en/nav/vlibrary.html

• ExploreLearning: http://www.explorelearning.com/

• BrainPOP: http://www.brainpop.com/

• IKnowthat.com: http://www.iknowthat.com/

• Wizards & Pigs: www.cogcon.org/gamegoo/games/wiznpigs/wiznpigs.html

• Flashcard Exchange: http://www.flashcardexchange.com/

• Mousercise: www.3street.org/mouse

• Lever Tutorial: www.elizrosshubbell.com/levertutorial

• Kitchen Chemistry: http://pbskids.org/zoom/games/kitchenchemistry/virtual-start.html

• Hurricane Strike!: http://meted.ucar.edu/hurrican/strike/index.htm

• Stellarium: http://www.stellarium.org/

• Instant Projects: http://instantprojects.org/  (Pitler, et al., 2007, pp. 193- 198)

REFERENCES

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.


Smith, M. K. (1999) The behaviourist orientation to learning. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education, Retrieved November 11, 2009, from www.infed.org/biblio/learning-behavourist.htm