504 Learning Strategies Synthesis Paper.pdf

7/28/2019 504 Learning Strategies Synthesis Paper.pdf

1/12

Constructivism for the 21st

Century Classroom 1

Running head: CONSTRUCTIVISM FOR THE 21ST

CENTURY CLASSROOM


Century Classroom

Jennifer Anderson

Boise State University

7/29/2012


2/12


Century Classroom 2

Abstract

This paper examines the connection between constructivism and educational technology

and identifies the need for these two concepts to work symbiotically in the future. First, it

outlines the basic assumptions of constructivism as a learning theory which features the active

role of students constructing their own knowledge. Second, educational technology is discussed

with an emphasis on using constructivist approaches. This paper discusses how integrating these

two will assist in preparing our students for the 21st

century and how educators must shift their

mindset to provide todays students with relevant, problem-based instruction to meet the

demands and immediacy for information of new generations. Finally, the importance of creating

a constructivist learning environment and curriculum is presented.


3/12


Century Classroom 3


Century Classroom

The learning theory known as constructivism has been revitalized by the innovative

technologies available today. Many researchers have identified the connection between

constructivist learning approaches and the field of educational technology. Both allow learners to

take an active role in the learning. Educational technologies allow teachers to present students

with new, authentic learning environments that may not be available otherwise due to location or

economic disadvantages. In order for constructivist approaches to be effective, teachers must

strive to create active learning environments that engage todays learners. The students of today

were born into multimedia technologies and do not learn how their parents and teachers may

have learned in the past. Teachers and administrators have the responsibility of creating a diverse

curriculum that stresses the use of technology and the basic constructivist principles. The theory

of constructivism lends itself well to integrating educational technology into the classroom, and

it is the educators job to shift thinking in order to prepare our students for the 21st

century.

Constructivism

Constructivism can be summarized in a single statement: Knowledge is constructed in

the mind of the learner (Bodner, 1986). Constructivism is a learning theory that emphasizes the

active role of the learner and the constructing of knowledge by the individual. The learning

environment should be as close to real as possible and allow students to develop meaning on

their own, allowing cooperation and collaboration to guide learning. We use our prior knowledge

and experiences in order to generate our new knowledge and continuously build upon what we

have already learned. Social constructivism emphasizes the learners responsibility to actively

participate. The leaders of constructivist thinking include Piaget, Dewey and Vygotsky (Rakes,


4/12


Century Classroom 4

Fields, & Cox, 2006). Piaget believed that knowledge is acquired as the result of a life-long

constructive process in which we try to organize, structure, and restructure our experiences in

light of existing schemes of thought, and thereby gradually modify and expand these schemes

(Bodner, 1986). The building of knowledge lies in the hands of the learner. Learners do not

match their understanding to the world around them but rather fit their knowledge to what is

already understood by others (Bodner, 1986). This form of learning is very personal; however,

teachers must be available to facilitate learning.

Applying constructivist approaches to the classroom is becoming more and more popular

with advancements in learning models, especially in science classrooms where experimental

learning is common. Constructivist approaches include learning by doing, problem-based

learning, hands-on learning, inquiry, and discovery learning. Constructivism also encourages and

promotes lifelong learning by making the process personal and continually adding to what we

already have learned. Rousseau emphasized learning by doing and the teachers role is being

that of presenting problems that would stimulate curiosity and promote learning (Duffy &

Cunningham, 1996.). Constructivist approaches build learners who can solve real world

problems and think for themselves. These approaches are easily translated into the field of

educational technology.

Educational Technology

Educational Technology can be a difficult concept for some people to grasp. It can be

considered a multidisciplinary activity, a set of tools, a branch of behavioral sciences (Issroff

& Scanlon, 2002), or a field of disciplined inquiry (Ross, Sullivan, & Tennyson, 1992).

Nevertheless, educational technology is an ever growing field and one that is extremely


5/12


Century Classroom 5

important for preparing our students for the future. The study of educational technology did not

begin until the 1960s and originated from applying behavioral theories to classroom instruction

(Ross, Sullivan, & Tennyson, 1992). The field of educational technology has a wide variety of

focus areas including implementation and application, research, evaluation, and the technology

itself (Issroff & Scanlon, 2002). There has been a discrepancy between the application of

educational technology and the research behind it. Ross, Sullivan, and Tennyson (1992) state,

Application needs research and research needs to be driven largely by variable and conditions

applicable to improving the learning environment. No matter what component we focus on in

educational technology the outcome should be improved learning.

As quoted in Issroff & Scanlons 2002 article, As the steam engine was to the first

revolution, so the computer is to the second, stated July 23, 1969 by the first chancellor Lord

Crowther at the Open University (OU) inauguration. The importance of technology to our future

generations is obvious, so why isnt the integration of it a larger priority? Strommen and Lincoln

(1992) point out that in the last 20 years technology has pierced through every aspect of society

and has become mainstream, while the field of teaching has not changed considerably in the past

100 years. The process of teaching and learning must evolve along with our ability to obtain

knowledge (Strommen & Lincoln, 1992). Todays teachers continue to teach as they were taught

and often resist changes, despite the overwhelming evidence for integrating technology. The

immediate task for American education is to embrace the future and empower our children to

learn with the cultural tools they have already been given (Strommen & Lincoln, 1992).

Duffy and Cunningham (1996) discuss how learning is mediated by tools and signs.

Tools are inventions that change the form, structure, and character of the activity (Duffy &

Cunningham, 1996). The hammer, automobile, computer, and word processor can all be


6/12


Century Classroom 6

considered tools because they change the physical form and structure of how things are done.

Duffy & Cunningham (1996) state culture creates the tool, but the tool changes the culture.

Educational technology has the ability to drastically change our culture. Students have gained the

ability to communicate with students across the globe and increase their connectivity in order to

gain more knowledge. The infusion of technology was helped by implementing constructivist-

based activities, such as collaboration and cooperation in a group, engaging in problem solving

and constructing potential solutions to societal dilemmas, and communicating the deeper

processing of content and the critical development of literacy skills and strategies (Richards,

1998).

Integrating Constructivism and Technology

As the amount of technology available, the level of technology skills of the teachers, and

the use of technology increased, the use of constructivist strategies in the classroom also

appeared to increase (Nanjappa & Grant, 2003). Nanjappa and Grant (2003) identify a

complementary relationship between computer technologies and constructivism. The focus of

both constructivism and technology are then on creation of learning environments (Nanjappa &

Grant, 2003). Learning in context is a focus of constructivism and educational technology allows

for better applications in context. Duffy and Cunningham (1996) identify that technology does

not focus on the individuals knowledge and activity, but rather on the activity occurring in the

environment.

The transactional distance theory is in agreement with constructivism in that they both

recognize the importance of the two directional movement of knowledge (Gokool-Ramdoo,

2008). Constructivism involves the active exchanges between learners, teachers, and tasks. TDT


7/12


Century Classroom 7

emphasizes the connection between the structure of the online classroom, the autonomy of the

learner, and the dialogue between the teacher and student (Gokool-Ramdoo, 2008). The dialogue

between teachers and students is extremely important to knowledge-building and can assist in the

evolution of understanding by both the teacher and the student. This two dimensional learning is

a benefit for both the student and the teacher. The more autonomous the learner, the less

structured the online classroom must be. In contrast, the young, less autonomous, or less

motivated students will require more feedback, collaboration, and guidance from a constructivist

teacher. This form of educational technology allows for adjustments in classroom structure, such

as allowing students to perform more individual research and inquiry, and promotes the active

learning that is central to constructivism.

Connectivism is an emerging theory that can also be easily translated into a constructivist

classroom. Connectivism focuses on learning through connections and relationships. A learning

community is created and considered a node within a greater community or network (Kop &

Hill, 2008). The knowledge within these communities is constantly changing and advancing

with new connections between people and communities. Social networking can be important for

building these communities or networks. It allows for greater access to knowledge that may not

be available otherwise. Students can connect with each other and gain access to a multitude of

resources with just a computer and internet access. Connectivism allows for constructivist

approaches because learners are able to collaborate and generate knowledge through experience,

collaboration, and inquiry.

Technology not only increases ones ability to access information but can also present

new environments for inquiry and problem-solving. The appropriate use of technology can

reinforce high cognitive skill development and complex thinking skills such as problem solving,


8/12


Century Classroom 8

reasoning, decision making, and scientific inquiry (Rakes, Fields, & Cox, 2006). The

constructivist learning environment should be problem based and allow for collaboration and

active learning while using a variety of tools to guide learning (Rakes, Fields, & Cox, 2006).

Increasing technology use can create a vehicle through which educators can address teaching and

learning opportunities for all students (Rakes, Fields, and Cox, 2006). Therefore, technology can

allow teachers to promote and increase cognitive skills, problem solving, and inquiry.

21st

Century Implications

So, How do we educate the new child? (Strommen & Lincoln, 1992). Strommen and

Lincoln (1992) point to the need for a change in curriculum, using constructivism as a guide.

Two features are identified by Strommen and Lincoln (1992) that are an important part of

applying constructivist approaches. The first is the benefit of play and experimentation for

learning. The importance of play is left behind after elementary school, and the old school form

of education is most representative of secondary education. Play and experimentation are

identified as important forms of learning through child development research, but are not

considered important after a certain age. However, the use of play and experimentation clearly is

how these students become so proficient with toys of today including cell phones, iPads, and

video games. Strommen and Lincoln (1992) advocate for more play and experimentation in the

modern classroom. Computers, video and other technologies engage children with the

immediacy they are used to in their everyday lives, and bends it to a new pedagogical purpose.

Really, it is not what equipment is used but how that equipment is used that will make the

difference (Strommen & Lincoln, 1992).


9/12


Century Classroom 9

In order to prepare our students for the 21st

century, constructivist views must be

translated into modern applications. This can be a scary thought for some teachers because

constructivism focuses on constructing personal meaning. What if students dont construct the

correct meaning or the one we want them to? Duffy and Cunningham (1996) identify two

implications for teachers using a constructivist framework, First, we do not assume that we

must have a common meaning, but rather we actively seek to understand the different

perspectives. Second, from a learning perspective, we do not assume that the learner will

acquire the experts meaning, and hence we do not seek a transmission approach to instruction.

Rather we seek to understand and challenge the learners thinking.

This challenge calls for a new model of teaching. One that changes the relationship

between the student and teacher, and provides an activity based, hands-on curriculum (Strommen

& Lincoln, 1992). This new model is referred to by Strommen & Lincoln (1992) as a child-

driven learning environment (CDLE). The teachers role in a CDLE must be different than in a

traditional classroom. Teachers are challenged with the responsibility to provide students with

dynamic, authentic learning experiences. They are a member of the team and are there to provide

technical assistance and creative consultation (Stommen & Lincoln, 1992). Costa and Kallick

(2012) identify the need for mind shifts or changes in current paradigms of education.

Changing curriculum to be more relevant to our students requires three major decisions

including, 1) What should be taughtgoals and outcomes; 2) how to organize and teach toward

those goalsinstruction; and 3) how we might know if those goals are being achieved using

these instructional strategiesassessment (Costa & Kallick, 2012). Although all of those

decisions have focused on education throughout time, there needs to be a change in how these

things are done by stakeholders in education.


10/12


Century Classroom 10

The first mind shift should be moving FROM knowing right answers TO knowing

how to behave when answers are not readily apparent (Costa & Kallick, 2012). Students of the

21st

century must know how to find the answers they do not know. Educational technology

allows for this mind shift and makes it easier as teachers to promote discovery learning and drift

away from just giving students the answers. Costa and Kallick (2012) identify a second mind

shift FROM transmitting meaning TO constructing meaning. The process of generating

knowledge is important to the retention of knowledge. Humans dont get ideas; they make

ideas (Costa & Kallick, 2012). Bodner (1986) also presents the need for a shift stating that we

must move from someone who teaches to someone who facilitates learning; a shift from

teaching by imposition to teaching by negotiation.

Conclusion

At this point in time, it is hard to picture a world without technology such as computers,

iPads, cell phones, and the like. With new technologies being available everyday it is paramount

that students are prepared for an ever changing society. As teachers we have the responsibility to

prepare our students for this changing world and to provide them the tools to prosper. It is

unreasonable to remain in the past and think education should become static. Our learners need a

constructivist approach allowing them the ability to construct their knowledge through

technology. Applying constructivist approaches has and will become easier over time.

Technology allows us to be more active, collaborative, and reflective while allowing us to evolve

as learners alongside the evolution of technology. The technological revolution is pushing us to

design technology rich curriculum and shift our mindset to the future.


11/12



References

Bodner, G.M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge.Journal of Chemical Education.

63. Retrieved July 5, 2012 from

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/chemed/bodnergroup/pdf/24_Construct.pdf

Costa, A.L. & Kallick, B. (2012). It takes some getting used to. In H. Jacobs, Curriculum 21:

Essential Education for a Changing World. (pp.210-226). Alexandria: ASCD.

Duffy, T.M. & Cunningham, D.J. (1996). Constructivism: implications for the design and

delivery of instruction. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Educational communications and

technology (pp. 170-199). Retrieved July 9, 2012 from

http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.c

om/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13

Gokool-Ramdoo, S. (2008). Beyond the theoretical impasse: Extending the applications of

transactional distance education theory. The International Review of Research in Open

and Distance Learning. 9(3). Retrieved July 9, 2012 from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/541/1151

Issroff, K. & Scanlon, E. (2002). Educational technology: The influence of theory.Journal of

Interactive Media in Education, 6. Retrieved from

http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6

Kop, R. & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?

The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 9(3). Retrieved

July 24, 2012 fromhttp://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137

Nanjappa, A. & Grant, M.M. (2003). Constructing on constructivism: The role of technology.

Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education. 2(1). Retrieved July 9,

2012 fromhttp://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.pd

Rakes, G.C., Fields, V.S., & Cox, K.E. (2006). The influence of teachers technology use on

instructional practices.Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 38(4) Retrieved

July 9, 2012 from

http://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructi

onal+Practices.pdf

Richards, R.T. (1998). Infusing technology and literacy into the undergraduate teacher education

curriculum through the use of electronic portfolios. T.H.E. Journal, 25(9), 46-50.

Ross, S., Sullivan, H., & Tennyson, R. (1992). Educational technology: Four decades of research

and theory.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(2), 5-7. Retrieved
http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/chemed/bodnergroup/pdf/24_Construct.pdfhttp://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/chemed/bodnergroup/pdf/24_Construct.pdfhttp://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/541/1151http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/541/1151http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.pdhttp://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.pdhttp://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.pdhttp://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructional+Practices.pdfhttp://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructional+Practices.pdfhttp://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructional+Practices.pdfhttp://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructional+Practices.pdfhttp://mytechtips.pbworks.com/f/Influence+of+Teachers'+Technology+Use+on+Instructional+Practices.pdfhttp://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.pdhttp://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2002-6http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/541/1151http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:nSV_8_E_PDwJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/chemed/bodnergroup/pdf/24_Construct.pdf


12/12



July 9, 2012 from

http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.boisestate.edu/stable/pdfplus/30218586.pdf

Strommen, E.F. & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology, and the future of classroom

learning.Education and Urban Society. 24(4). Retrieved July 9, 2012 from

http://alicechristie.com/classes/530/constructivism.pdf
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.boisestate.edu/stable/pdfplus/30218586.pdfhttp://alicechristie.com/classes/530/constructivism.pdfhttp://alicechristie.com/classes/530/constructivism.pdfhttp://alicechristie.com/classes/530/constructivism.pdfhttp://www.jstor.org.libproxy.boisestate.edu/stable/pdfplus/30218586.pdf

Documents

504 Learning Strategies Synthesis Paper.pdf