Constructivism, Technology and the Future of Classroom Learning
Behaviorism and Instructional Technology
How Does Technology Facilitate Constructivist Learning?
Behaviorism and Instructional Technology
John K. Burton, David M. Moore, & Susan G. Magliaro
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
Behaviorism is no longer a popular orientation or theory in education or instructional design. It is seen as an outdated, old fashioned way at looking at learning. This is somewhat surprising since, according to the authors, behaviorism is the basis for such instructional innovations as, among others, computer-assisted learning, competency-based education, and even social constructivism. All of these make up important aspects of instructional technology methods today.
Before dealing with instruction or instructional technology, the authors give a “brief” outline of behaviorism. They begin with the basic assumptions and concepts, including the role of the learner, the nature of learning, and the generality of learning principles. Skinner, among other behaviorists, claims that, contrary to popular belief, learners are not passive; rather, learners learn by doing, experiencing, and engaging in trial and error.
The nature of learning is a change in behavior due to experience. These experiences are dependent on contiguity, the close paring of stimulus and response time, and contingency, or the dependency between the behavioral event and the response/consequence. This means that leaning must occur within a given time frame, and that there must be a natural order to the learning.
The generality of learning principles deal with respondent learning, operant learning and observational learning, all of which rely on building associations. Each model also relies on discrimination, which is the act of responding differently to different stimuli, and geneneralization, which involves responding similarly to similar stimuli. Both processes are crucial to facilitating adaptation to new learning environments. The authors go on to describe respondent learning, operant learning and observational learning in great detail. The interesting part comes, however, when the beginnings of instructional technology are applied to behaviorist theories.
Skinner, among others, got the ball rolling, so to speak, with his teaching machine, an instructional technology devise designed to give immediate feedback. This device worked quite well, and scores and outcomes were increased until boredom of the student set it. However, the idea of immediate feedback became very important in the progression of instructional technology. The authors go on to deal with films as instructional technology, and finally, programmed instruction. All three media are the basis of current instructional technology techniques and media.
In this article, there was very little to agree or disagree with, as it was almost totally an historical overview of the role of behaviorism in instructional technology. The article, was, however, short on current applications of behaviorism in instructional technology. I would like to know what impact, besides the above, has behaviorism had on current techniques and theories? Specifically, how does behaviorism and constructivism work together, as the authors said they did, but gave no examples? How does behaviorism fit into the current model of web-based instruction?
Behaviorism has, to a certain degree, become anathema in theories of learning. An interesting question for me is to what extent is learning cognitive and to what extent is it stimulus-response? How would that answer play into instructional technology design? Are not most of instructional technology applications currently designed on behaviorist models? Is this why there is “no significant different” between educational outcomes using instructional technology and those that don’t? Are we making the mistake of basing instructional (technology) activities on the stimulus-response model because they are easier to produce in the electronic/computer environment? An article that deals with behaviorism and instructional technology needs to address these vital educational issues.
How Does Technology Facilitate Constructivist Learning?
Bettina Lankard Brown
ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education,
Information Series No. 378, 1998
Essentially, there are three ways in which technology facilitates constructivist learning principles: through self-directed learning, through collaborative learning, and through critical analysis. According to Murphy, 1997, technology is viewed as an “. . . optimal medium for the application of constructivist principles to learning.”
Technology allows for carefully designed materials to assist individual construction of knowledge by providing alternative pathways to information. The use of hypertext carries the behaviorist stimulus-response approach one step further in that it can allow learners to, in a sense, create their own stimulus based on their particular learning style. This facilitates a self-directed approach toward learning.
Collaborative learning and technology can go hand in hand, thus furthering the facilitation of constructivist learning. Chat rooms, threaded discussions, online conferences, and others all foster an environment of shared learning. Students are not learning in a vacuum; rather, they are nurturing and enhancing each other’s knowledge base.
Finally, an important part of constructivist learning is critical analysis, and in this day and age of “information overload,” fostering critical thinking skills is paramount. Students are bombarded with information of all sorts, due to the availability of resources on the Internet, and “The role of education in the age of information will be the development of disciplined readers, skilled in the art of abductive logic.”
The author gives plenty of evidence and helpful examples to support her position. Indeed, it would be almost impossible to disagree with anything the author states as the benefits of technology in education are well documented, and, as current trends lean toward constructivist learning, everything goes hand in hand quite well.
Constructivism, Technology and the Future of Classroom Learning
Erik F. Strommen
http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/publications/papers/construct.html
Although technology has revolutionized American culture, it has been slow to have much of an impact on education. American educators have been rushing to catch up with technology and to adjust the process of teaching, which has remained mostly the same for the past 100 years. This has caused an estrangement of schools from society and from the children in it, specifically because the way people are delivered information and absorb that information has changed greatly with the huge increase in the use of technology in society.
The author’s solution to this dilemma is not to simply think up clever ways to use computers in the classroom, but to create a guiding philosophy that dictates changes in the curriculum and uses technology as effective pieces of those changes. This new philosophy would be based on constructivist theories of learning.
The new educational system would involve specific notions. First, play and experimentation are valuable forms of learning. An additional notion would be that when children work together, compelling advancements are achieved. In order for children to work together in play and experimentation, the relationship between teacher and student must change to where the teacher is more of a guide rather than a giver of knowledge. Strommen calls this a “child-driven leaning environment,” or CDLE.
Because children leaning by doing, technology would play a natural role in the implementation of constructivism. However, Strommen is quick to point out that it is not the equipment itself that will make the difference, but how the equipment is used. He uses a four-step process of exploration, conceptualization, production, and post-produciton.
Most of the claims of the author are supported by references, but he does make assumptions without empirical data to back those assumptions. For example, he does not site any research to test his theory that students would indeed learn better under a constructivist approach. Additionally, he makes the claim that the ways of obtaining knowledge in society have greatly changed. It could be argued that these ways have not cognitively changed; rather, the medium through which the knowledge is obtained has changed. Research would need to be presented to make either case. However, even without data, the pedagogic logic is there; have children work together in a collaborative manner on a meaningful topic and they will learn better. Use technology to make the topic interesting and meaningful.
The next logical step after this article would be to have some concrete examples or models of instruction based on this model. For example, the author speaks mainly of children. How exactly would constructivism fit into a higher education setting? What kinds of practical examples could be given to help professors develop their courses?