Learning Theories
Educational Technology and Life » Blog Archive » Context-Embedded Learning (In A Nutshell)
<p>Perhaps the most fundamental property of a constructivist learning environment is that it offers a context for student learning. </p>
<p>Context-embedded learning has been a cornerstone of the constructivist movement since the early 1900’s. Now, nearly a century later, video games and simulations can offer new contexts for student learning that would not have been available to students in the past.</p>
A Modest Curriculum Proposal | Edutopia
<p>
In discussing the need for hands-on science learning, Nichols asked us to imagine parents at the dinner table asking their young son or daughter that age-old question "What did you learn in school today?" The child shrugs, as children often do, and says, "We learned to play basketball." The parents then ask, "How did you do that?" The child answers, "Well, we sat in the gym and the teacher passed out these books, and we turned to chapter one, about passing the basketball, and we learned there are three types of passes: the bounce pass, the chest pass, and the one-handed pass."
</p>
<p>
"OK," parents would say, wanting to know more, "what happened next?" The child continues, "We read the next chapter about dribbling. And another chapter on shooting. We learned there’s the set shot, the bank shot, and the jump shot." After a few minutes of this recitation, the parents, increasingly exasperated, challenge their child: "But did the teacher ever give you a basketball and let you go on the court and play?" "No,” the child says with a sigh. "We just read the book until the bell rang."</p>
Constructivism
JOLT: CREST+ Model: Writing Effective Online Discussion Questions
The CREST+ model, a model
for writing effective online discussion questions,
covers the cognitive nature of the question, the
reading basis, any experiential possibility, style
and type of question, and finally ways to structure
a good question. This model encourages students to
participate in online forum discussions, provides a
template for new online faculty to use in creating
effective discussion questions, and promotes a
higher level processing of the material.
The CREST+
model covers the cognitive nature of the question [C], the
reading basis [R], any experiential [E] possibility, style
and type of question [ST] , and finally ways to structure
a good question [+].
Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Technology
Discovery Through eLearning: Shifting from Content-centred to Activity-centred ID
Half an Hour: Stager, Logo and Web 2.0
Are the Basics of Instructional Design Changing? ~ Stephen's Web ~ by Stephen Downes
Two major sets of affordances offered in online learning are not found in traditional learning. First, online, communication occurs not through a channel, but through a network. And second, communication flows not merely through a passive medium but through a computational environment.
The theory of distributed representation has a profound implication for pedagogy, as it suggests that
learning (and teaching, such as it is) is not a process of communication, but rather, a process of immersion. Put loosely, it suggests the idea of teaching not by telling or even demonstrating but rather through the creation (or identification) of an environment into which a learner may be immersed.
Course Management Systems and Pedagogy
Constructivism & ID
<p>
The expert/novice literature within cognitive psychology reaches
similar conclusions about the nature of expertise. Researchers
have found that expertise is
</p><p>
--largely intuitive and inaccessible to direct reflection (e.g.,
Bloom, 1986)
</p><p>
--more pattern-matching than rule-following (Suchman, 1987, Bereiter,
1991)
</p><p>
--more qualitative than quantitative (White & Frederiksen,
1986)
</p><p>
--highly context- and domain-dependent (Brandt, 1988-89).
</p><p>
Such a view of expertise seems also to fit the field of ID.</p>
The role I am advocating for analysis is fairly modest. Analysis
provides an overall framework for instruction, and provides extra
help on some tricky parts, such as identifying likely misconceptions
or previous knowledge that may undercut students' efforts to understand
the content. The role of the designer is then to design a series
of experiences-interactions or environments or products-intended
to help students learn effectively. Neither the instruction nor
the assessment of learning can be as confidently dictated as thought
to be possible in the past. But the important point to keep in
mind is that the design role is not lost in such a revised system;
the design still happens, only it's less analytical, more holistic,
more reliant on the cooperation of teachers and materials and
learners to generously fill in the gaps left gaping by the limitations
of our analytical tools. Instruction thus construed becomes much
more integrally connected to the context and the surrounding culture.
ID thus becomes more truly <i>systemic</i> in the the sense that
it is highly sensitive to the conditions of use.
Half an Hour: Kirschner, Sweller, Clark (2006) - Readings
Half an Hour: Kirschner, Sweller, Clark (2006) - Summary
Free Learning and Control Learning: On the So-Called Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching » SlideShare
Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning
A response to the Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark article, specifically focused on demonstrating that problem based learning and inquiry learning are highly scaffolded, not "minimally guided." Research is cited showing the effectiveness of PBL.
D-Ed Reckoning: Downes responds
Stephen Downes responds to a long review of his presentation criticizing Kirschner et al. This addresses some of the inaccuracies in the review and delves deeper into what a networked theory of learning really means.
<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">Kirshner</span> argues, very clearly, that non-<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31">instructivist</span> methods result in no better learning than direct instruction, and sometimes in *less* learning, because of the 'cognitive overhead' required in self-directed methodologies.<br><br><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32">Kirshner's</span> argument on this point is not based on experimental data, but rather, on his theory of cognition. Specifically, he argues that short-term memory has a limited capacity, and that if some of this capacity is not available for new facts (because it is taken up 'selecting scientific principles') then the transfer of information to the student is reduced.<br><br>I respond to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33">this</span> argument by showing how <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34">Kirshner's</span> theory is false. We do not 'retrieve theories' into short term memory and then 'select' from them. That is not how thinking works; that is not ow scientific thinking works. And therefore, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35">Kirshner's</span> argument, on these grounds, against student-directed learning, fails.
The best mechanism for demonstrating knowledge is not likely the production of a certain set of facts on demand. Expertise in a discipline on the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_54">part</span> of a student is something that is typically *recognized*, not measured, by people who are already experts in the field.
D-Ed Reckoning: Downes on Kirschner
Lengthy response to Downes' presentation summarizing criticisms of the Kirschner et al paper on "minimally guided instruction." There's some inaccuracies in this response, which Downes addresses in his comment. The author doesn't see that instructivist and constructivist teaching methods really differ from each other.
Half an Hour: Free Learning and Control Learning: On the So-Called Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching
Text from Downes' presentation critiquing the Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark article. Downes goes through a number of Kirschner et al's arguments, showing the internal inconsistency, lapses of logic, and lack of evidence. Citations included.
A Review of What Instructional Designers Do: Questions Answered and Questions Not Asked
Research comparing ID models with what instructional designers actually do for their jobs. The authors conclude that ID isn't so much about following a rigid process, but about solving complex problems and making nuanced decisions.
New link: http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/147/140
Results showed that, while instructional designers apparently do make use of process-based ID models, they do not spend the majority of their time working with them nor do they follow them in a rigid fashion. They also engage in a wide variety of other tasks that are not reflected in ID models.
Rowland (1992) reported his results to be congruent with the research on expertise and indicated that expert instructional designers clearly employ a definable problem solving and decision-making process. He suggested that ID tools, unlike procedural design models, should foster a deep understanding of the system of concern and should include such characteristics as flexibility of structures and processes, a workspace for construction of problem representation, and mechanisms for making multiple links between problems and solutions. Rowland suggested that, rather than to be taught procedures or even problem-solving heuristics, novices need to develop experience in the design process and that a case-based method of teaching, providing involvement with real or realistic situations, might be the most appropriate way for new instructional designers to learn the design process.
Design is always about making judgments about design situations that are complex, rich and replete with tensions and contradictions.
Dynamic Learning Communities: An Alternative to Designed Instructional Systems
Contrasts the idea of open, dynamic learning communities with closed courses developed through traditional instructional systems design processes. Examines the pros and cons of DLCs and when they would be most effective. Also looks at how the role of instructional designers is changing, and proposes different ways we might define our role.
Heretofore, instructional designers have thought they were in the business
of designing instructional systems to meet prespecified learning
objectives. But first the constructivist movement--and now communication
technologies themselves--seem to be thre atening this conception as the
sole way to support learning. People are learning without help from
designed instruction! In many settings, in fact, "natural" learning is
more prevalent than "designed" learning <a href="#resnick">(Resnick, 1987)</a>.
We believe that
the situation requires a reexaminination of our core roles. Are we in
the business of designing instruction or are we in the business of
supporting valuable learning, wherever it may happen? The answer to this
question will result in either a narrow or broad interpretation of our
role and its relationship to non-instructional forms of learning.
Our own belief is that dynamic learning communities are proper objects of
study. We should seek to understand how such communities function, how
they grow, how they can be nurtured, and how they can be replicated across
diverse settings. But nurturing is different than designing. We must
respect the integrity of the community. In time, we may come to think of
ourselves more as <em>learning technologists</em> than as <em>instructional
technologists</em>, and <em>learning support specialists</em> more than
<em>instructional designers</em>.
CARET: The Impact of Media and Technology in Schools
1998 literature review of technology in education, showing benefits of technological tools especially within constructivist learning environments.
Top News - Tech encourages students' social skills
Using technology with kindergarteners and first graders to support social constructivist learning. Registration required to read the whole article.
Well-integrated technology opens social networks for students and allows children to develop key social skills, according to two recent studies conducted by researchers at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Social Networking: Learning Theory in Action
Exploring how social networking applications could be used to create a more social constructivist learning environment to support collaboration, creativity, and networking. (The author calls it "social learning theory" and contrasts it with "objectivist" learning, but never uses the phrase "social constructivism." Still, it seems like that's what she's describing.)
Designing for Diversity Within Online Learning Environments
The author argues that constructivist learning environments where multiple perspectives are respected and there is no single "right "answer" are better for encouraging diversity. The ideas for instructional design for diversity are more theory-based than practice-based, but this has some interesting concepts.
"The major advantage of this learning model is that one of its key design goals is to encourage students to bring multiple perspectives to questions/cases/problems/issues and projects as part of their learning. This approach to learning views diversity as a strength to be exploited rather than a problem to be solved."
What is the unique idea in Connectivism?
George Siemens on how connectivism differs from constructivism and other learning theories, starting from the point that "a new idea is often an old idea in today's context."
Connectivism is the application of network principles to define both knowledge and the process of learning. Knowledge is defined as a particular pattern of relationships and learning is defined as the creation of new connections and patterns as well as the ability to maneuver around existing networks/patterns.
Connectivism_Week1
Table comparing 4 learning theories: behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, connectivism. Includes a summary of what's different about connectivism.
Main Articles: 'New Schemas for Mapping Pedagogies and Technologies', Ariadne Issue 56
Schemas for categorizing the use of pedagogies, learning theories, and technologies. For example, Table 1 maps learning theories (behaviorism, cognitive constructivism, social constructivism, and situated learning) against types of technologies. Online communication tools offer more potential for social constructivist interaction and joint construction of knowledge.
This article also suggests a way to map tool use along three dimensions:
- Individual - Social
- Information - Experience
- Passive - Active This isn't a simple framework where a single tool always is used the same way. Blogs can be more social or more based on individual reflection, and could be at different places in that framework depending on the actual learning activities.
Learning in Tandem: Instructional design is dead
One instructional designer's reflections on the problems in the field, including an over-reliance on systematic processes and an under-reliance on actual research
Basically, ID as it is currently taught is just following the process, step by step. It's not rocket science. What IS rocket science (or at least a lot harder) is to figure out how to apply process with the endless number of variables that affect any learning need. This is where ID falls short. Instructional designers in too many instances are so tied to the models and the process that the variables and subtleties of good design are sacrificed.
Call it education or instructional design...its all learning. So where do ID's fall short? To a certain extent, its following the "process" too closely. People are complex, learning is complex, motivation is complex--and no process is going to address all of these complexities. Good IDs know this and aren't afraid to go "off the reservation" when they need to. Most IDs don't.
<div>Ok, so what does this all mean? It means that designing effective, motivating learning is actually really hard. It means that instructional designers need to be really good critical thinkers. It means that as a profession, instructional designers need to be trained to not only know the process, but also how to recognize the limitations of process. <br></div><div><br></div><div>More than anything, if instructional design is going to survive and thrive as a profession, we need to be leaders--leaders in research, leaders in our organizations, and leaders in our field, not accepting the mediocre. Otherwise, instructional design is dead.</div>
Plain_Gillian - Reflections on Learning: How Connectivism and Constructivism Differ
More ideas on how connectivism & constructivism differ, looking at the role of personal perception in constructivism versus the role of the network in providing dynamic feedback in connectivism
Instructional Design for Online Learning - Instructional Design Models
A collection of instructional design models and theories in 4 categories: behaviorist, cognitivist, constructivist, and prescriptive models