Constructivism in Practice

This week’ learning steered us in the direction of the “constructivist/constructionist theories.  These two are viewed as the same theory by some while others say that they are totally different.  I have come to understand that Constructionism is an extension of constructivism.  We primarily hear about Seymour Papert’s influence coming mainly from Jean Piaget’s work, however, his work was also influenced by John Dewey and Maria Montessori (Thurmond, 1999).  I found this to be enlightening because I am fond of Maria Montessori and her work.

With regards to both theories, they support the idea that in-taking knowledge is more than a passive activity wherein the learner simply receives knowledge as a result of simply hearing it.  These theories argue that knowledge is attentively built in the mind of the learner.  Even further, this construction is based in the understanding that the mind must experience a sense of disequilibration - encountering something we don’t know (Laureate, 2010).  According to Dr. Orey’s explanation of Jean Piaget’s constructivist theory, when this experience occurs the mind will strive to regain balance or “equilibration” using a process of assimilation or accommodation.  Dr. Orey discussed how Seymour Papert extended this theory to explain that while a learner is experiencing one or both of these processes during learning they use the construction of artifacts to complete the learning process by reestablishing equilibration (Laureate, 2010).  In essence, learner proves that they have internalized the knowledge, i.e. “learned it” by constructing a product.  This product or artifact is more than merely an articulation of what was learned but requires learners to use a combination of complex learning skills, collaboration with others to create a visual product, and preceding a presentation of the artifact they reflect of their learning experience. 

Project based learning (PBL), learning by design (LBD), and generating and testing hypotheses were three of the instructional strategies presented in this week’s resources.  These three strategies exemplify the are the essence of constructionist/constructivist learning where students will create an artifact as part of the learning outcome based on an authentic and real life experience (Orey, 2001).  In line with constructionist thinking, they all focus on the learner and the active learning that they are responsible for obtaining.  Likewise, collaboration is also a common component of the three however in LBD it is an optional.  Unlike LBD, PBL and generating and testing hypotheses are not audience driven.  In all strategies, the teacher must engage in careful planning and preparing for the learning and they all must have a clearly established objective and learning outcome at the onset.  Lastly, these instructional strategies encompass presentation of the learning using the artifact and reflective discussion that may lead to revision and further development of the learner’s ideas (Orey, 2001). 

In conclusion, constructionist/constructivist learning is worth an educator gaining a comprehensive understanding.  Students are often more engaged and motivated during these meaningful type learning experiences and participates in active learning.  More ever, the teacher is able to take on a facilitative role and can appreciate observing growth and development in the “joy of learning” for his or her students.

Work cited:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Seven. Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories. [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page.

Thurmond, M. (1999). Constructivism and constructionism.  Retrieved from http://online.sfsu.edu/~foreman/itec800/finalprojects/annmariethurmond/home.html

Cognitivism in Practice

The instructional strategy cues, questions, and advance organizers supports the cognitivist theory in that it focuses on strengthening the mental processes used in learning – retrieve, application, and organization (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn. & Malenoski, 2007).  When students are asked a series of higher order questions in a topical discussion they must brainstorm (retrieve) as many connections they have stored about a topic.  They then need to organize those connections in a relative way to use that knowledge in their responses.  When students are being introduced to possibly new information from a cognitive approach this strategy can be useful in engaging learners because for many their interest has been peeked upon realizing they know little or nothing about the topic or they may be anxious to participate because they are familiar with the content.  When advance organizers are used to facilitate the process of brainstorming students are able to construct a visual plan for learning.  This plan can also be a helpful tool as notes to reference information in preparing for assessments and present a topic with the ability of increasing the effectiveness of transferring knowledge.  Another advantage to using technology based tools with cues, questions, and advance organizers is that they allow students to process an extensive amount of information easily so that they may focus on using the knowledge obtained in more critical applications to gain new understanding and or solve real world problems.

The instructional strategy of summarizing and note taking help students to sift through information to determine the most pertinent knowledge and synthesize it with their schema or collaborative efforts.  This process is exemplified successfully when students are able to communicate the information in their own words.  As stated in chapter 6, Summarizing and Note Taking, technology can scaffold, provide support, and assist with organization while students are learning to summarize and take notes (Pitler, et al., 2007).  Various cognitivist designed technological software include features embedded within them such as Track Changes and Auto Summarize to teach, allow students to practice, and provide frameworks for both teacher and student to create summaries in a more informed fashion (Pitler, et al., 2007).  In respect to note taking, frequent and various formats can increase student achievement specifically when combining graphic representation, such as webbing and pictographs and outlining (Pitler, et al., 2007).

Lastly, virtual field trip tools are especially unique in that they help to provide rich and engaging events to expand students understanding.  Orey discussed that often times these experiences are foundational in respect to learning a network of ideas because they create episodic memories that students are able to use to make connections in learning the new content that is being presented within a network of ideas (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010).  Most helpful to me was the idea that this approach can allow teachers to apply a combination of theories (cognitive, constructivist, and social constructivist) into one episodic event which increases the opportunities for students to transition the knowledge into long term memory where it is retrievable at a later time (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010).

Works Cited:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010b). Program six. Spotlight on Technology [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

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

Behaviorism in Practice

 Reinforcing Effort is a powerful instructional strategy that correlates to the behaviorist learning theory.  I believe that this primarily true because as Dr Orey expressed in Instructional Theory vs. Learning Theory, it actively engages the learner an in immersive learning experience where they are embedded in the context of the learning (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010c).   Reinforcing effort is the enhancement of students’ understanding of the relationship between effort and achievement by addressing their attitudes and beliefs about learning (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn. & Malenoski, 2007).  According to Skinner in 1972, the behaviorist learning theory is primarily about operant conditioning which is the rewarding of part of a desired behavior or a random act that approaches it (Pitler, et al., 2007).   When students connect effort with achievement they are then motivated to put a more conscious effort into their learning because they know the end result will be achievement or success whether it be intrinsic, extrinsic or a combination of both.  When we provide students with a clear picture of what effort looks like through examples of their peers or even better their own effort on a consistent basis they are more likely to embrace their ability to accomplish anything they put the proper effort into (Pitler, et al., 2007).  This is the desired behavior that every educator expects their student to exhibit.  This week’s chapter reading on reinforcing effort shares some simple yet powerful technology based learning experiences that educators have used to assist students with making the effort-achievement connection.  Basic software tools such as spreadsheets to collect data and graphing functions that visually display the results can clearly help students make this connection.  Data collection tools were also discussed as a means to show students the same correlation using observational or survey collected data.  In each of these cases the student is at the center of the learning experience (directly or indirectly where action is required on their part) which motivates him or her to put more effort into the learning process.

Homework and practice is another powerful instructional strategy that correlates to the behaviorist learning theory.  With this instructional strategy however, it approaches learning from a drill and practice view with the objective of becoming proficient at the application of skill combinations and furthering a student’s understanding of a concept (Pitler, et al., 2007).   Drill and practice however, does not have to be dull and uninteresting.  Educational technology provides a wide range of software programs that enable students to simplify research for assignments using word processing application tools such as in Microsoft Word to using we resources which allow students to practice concepts and skills repeatedly from virtually anywhere there is an internet connection (Pitler, et al., 2007).  Other  programs help students to focus on content leaning using multimedia programs that maintain student engagement, scaffolding progressions allowing for understanding and practice to independent application, and immediate feedback to reinforce correct learning behaviors or clear up misconceptions to inhibit undesirable learning behaviors (Pitler, et al., 2007).

Work Cited:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010c). Program three. Instructional Theory vs. Learning Theory [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

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