Change Project: Redeveloping INTE 5160
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Change Project: Redeveloping INTE 5160



This is the final document with all the information regarding the redevelopment of INTE 5160, Managing ILT Programs.

This is the final document with all the information regarding the redevelopment of INTE 5160, Managing ILT Programs.



Total Views
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 68 68


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Change Project: Redeveloping INTE 5160 Change Project: Redeveloping INTE 5160 Document Transcript

    • Design Document for the Redesign ofINTE 5160: Managing ILT ProjectsINTE 6750: Current Trends and Issues in InstructionalTechnologyKenny Hirschmann & Kim ProkoschNovember 19, 2011AbstractTo satisfy the requirement of the Emergence of the Profession assignment, thisdocument will explore some of the history of Instructional Design and Technology andDistance Education. However, the main focus of this document is on the origins of theSocial Constructivist movement and the impact of technology on its models. INTE 5160is being redeveloped within a Social Constructivist and Learner-Centered framework,so this historical perspective helps to elucidate the context for our design decisions.I. Instructional Design and TechnologyEmergence of Social ConstructivismIn the early 20th Century, instructional technology consisted of a teacher, blackboardand chalk. Behaviorism was the dominant philosophy at the time, and John B. Watsonwas one of its most prominent proponents. Watson was only concerned about theeffect of learning on behavior. To him, behavior was simply a matter of stimulus andresponse (Watson, 1913). It wasn’t until the 1920s and 1930s that the philosophy ofconstructivism truly began to take shape.Though many attribute some of the earliest constructivist writings to John Dewey(who happened to be a native of Burlington, VT), it was Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotskythat separately fathered what was to become the dominant philosophy of learning forthe next century. Like Behaviorism, Constructivism is a philosophy and not aninstructional theory. However, unlike Behaviorism, it has a distinct appreciation andinterest in human consciousness. Piaget was interested in how children perceive the 1
    • world, how they develop, and most importantly how they learn. Through his researchhe came to realize that knowledge is gained through interaction. It is not simplyabsorbed or memorized, but rather constructed by active participation and discovery.Piaget believed that in formal education the role of the teacher is to facilitate theconstruction of knowledge by creating opportunities to explore and assimilate, not topush knowledge down (Livingston, 2010).Vygotsky came to a similar conclusion through his studies, though he placed moreemphasis on the value of social interaction than Piaget did. To Vygotsky, a child mustlearn twice, once through social interaction and then once individually. He theorizedthat children have a “Zone of Proximal Development” which is the additional learningthat is to be gained through a “More Knowledgeable Other” such as a teacher or aparent (Vygotsky, 1978).The work of Piaget and Vygotsky began a cascade of research down two parallelpaths, one based on cognitive theory and the other on social theory. Interestinglyenough, both Vygotsky, Piaget and those that followed believed that interaction isnecessary for effective learning, yet until the advent of interactive computing mostinstructional technology of 20th century was passive. During Vygotsky’s time it wassilent film and then the “talkies”. Piaget, who lived much longer, lived to see therise of radio and then television.Following in the path of Vygotsky, Jerome Bruner theorized that structure is arequired component of a child’s learning. He developed models of scaffoldinginstruction and the spiral curriculum that went on to influence M. David Merrill andCharles Reigeluth, among others.In the 1990s, as computers became more prevalent and constructivist teachingmethods began to spread in schools throughout America, new theories of instructionaldesign began to emerge. Early in the decade the American Psychological Association(APA) created a Task Force on Psychology in Education whose main task was todevelop a set of common principles drawn from the application of contemporarypsychological theory in education. The result was the development of 12 principlesthat helped to define the learner-centered model of instruction. This model focuses2
    • instruction on specific learner-needs based on their personal history, interests andneeds. The principles define how to design instruction and model teaching practicesto achieve the highest levels of motivation and learning possible (McCombs & Vakili, .There have been many proponents of this new methodology including David Jonassen.Jonassen Is a proponent of Activity Theory in the development of collaborativelearning environments. Activity Theory was first postulated by Vygotsky andelaborated on primarily by A.N. Leontiev. The concept of Activity Theory is thetriangular relationship between a subject, an object and some type of mediation toolor instrument between them which could be culture, language or philosophy. Thisdiffered from cognitivism in that it studied not just the individual, but the wholeactivity. Jonassen extrapolates this theory to suggest that effective learningenvironments are created when opportunities are provided to simulate authentic,relevant real-world experiences for learners.While this is by no means a comprehensive study in the development of SocialConstructivist theory over the last century, it does provide a framework for ourproject. Using many of the concepts that are common throughout the breadth ofwork, we will attempt to apply elements of several different models to this course.II. INTE 5160 Redevelopment: Project OverviewExecutive SummaryINTE 5160 is being redeveloped to give students a more robust learning experience.The most recent iteration of the course focused on the completion of only oneproject, and it was evident that this approach did not meet learners’ needs. Thecourse is being redeveloped with a very different structure, which will allow eachlearner to participate more fully in the coursework and achieve more tangiblelearning outcomes.Summaries 3
    • 1. Instructional setting: INTE 5160, Managing ILT Projects, is a required course in UC Denver’s graduate certificate and masters program in Instructional and Learning Technologies with a focus in eLearning design and implementation. All graduate students enrolled in these programs must take this course, which is focused on teaching comprehensive project management skills in the eLearning field. This graduate-level courses taught in a fully online, 8-week long format, through UC Denver’s LMS (eCollege). 2. Goals and outcomes: There are many goals of this redevelopment project, and they are all learner-centric. At this stage of the project, the goals are: a. To give students the opportunity to learn management knowledge that can be clearly transferred to a professional setting. b. To provide students with a robust learning environment, with varied assignments and methods of assessment. c. To bolster interpersonal skills by working in a collaborative, group format. d. To ensure that the knowledge gained in the course can be applied in different types of professional settings (including higher education, corporate environments, etc.) e. To provide students with a supportive learning environment. f. To use varied types of collaborative and communication tools that will allow students to gain the skills that will enrich their ability to succeed in the online environment as both students and professionals. g. To reinforce skills learned elsewhere in the program. h. To meet professional competencies for management of instructional design (AECT and IBSTPI). 3. Learner needs and characteristics: The students who will take this course are enrolled in either the certificate or masters program in Information and Learning Technologies, with a focus on eLearning design and implementation.4
    • They will have varied educational and workplace backgrounds, but all will have at least a bachelor’s degree prior to their enrollment in this course. All learners will have prior experience in eCollege and working on both individual and group projects for the program.4. Instructional objectives and assessments: At this time, the instructional objectives and methods of assessment have not been fully developed. Below is the tentative weekly outline for the course. Week 1: Introduction to Project Management for eLearning Week 2: Analyze/Initiate Week 3: Design/Plan (Part I) Week 4: Design/Plan (Part II) Week 5: Development & Implementation/Execute Week 6: Evaluate/Monitor/Control/Close Week 7: Ethical considerations Week 8: Presentations The weekly agendas and activities are found in the Analysis section of this document.5. Project management: This project is a collaborative effort. Kenny Hirschmann and Kim Prokosch are the primary participants in this project, and they delegate work and assign tasks to effectively manage this project. All major milestones are created in conjunction with Brent Wilson, the director of the ILT program. Patti Shank is an outside consultant for this project, and is involved in the creation of materials and verification of created content.6. Tool assessment: The main tools used for this project will be the UC Denver’s LMS and Dreamweaver. The use of the college’s LMS is mandatory, and both developers are very familiar with Dreamweaver. 5
    • 7. Instructional design model: INTE 5160 is being redeveloped within a Social Constructivist and Learner-Centered framework. 8. Learning activities: The learning activities in this course will be highly contextual and will require active participation from learners. Activities will be both individual and group-based, and will require many different types of deliverables.III. AnalysisA. Instructional Setting 1. Instructional need or opportunity: The need for this project arose after the summer 2011 offering of INTE 5160. At that time, the course was developed around one main project (a group-based response to a RFP), and the course did not deliver the stated learning outcomes. Students in the ILT program have a very reasonable expectation of learning skills that can immediately be applied to their workplace, and the fact that this was not the case in the summer 2011 version of the course proved that there was an enormous opportunity in the redevelopment of the course. 2. Pacing and rationale: INTE 5160 is an instructor-led course, and will progress on a weekly schedule. There will be structured activities in every week of the course, as detailed in the Analysis section of this document. 3. Hardware and software: Students must have access to a computer with internet access to complete this course. Learners must have a recommended or supported browser installed on that computer (see part 4 of this section for more information regarding browsers). Learners must also satisfy the LMS’ technical requirements, which are listed on the UC Denver website here. 4. Browsers and version numbers: The list of recommended and supported browsers for UC Denver’s implementation of eCollege is found here. All students are expected to be in compliance with these guidelines.6
    • 5. Internet access: Students can have any type of internet access, including dial- up access and better. There will be multimedia portions of the course, and for that reason, it is recommended that students have at least a DSL connection. 6. Firewalls, parental control, access, or security: There will not be any significant security-related issues regarding access to the course. Students will already have access to eCollege and will have already used it for previous courses. UC Denver’s technical support staff will be available to provide any necessary assistance. 7. Other hardware/software challenges: A portion of the course will be devoted to investigating and using web-based technology tools. Students will be expected to demonstrate aptitude in the research and use of these tools, and will be responsible for communicating with their peers and instructors if they experience difficulties. 8. Stakeholders: Some of the major stakeholders in this project are: a. ILT program faculty and staff b. Current ILT program students 9. Other instructional context issues: As students of the ILT program, both Kenny and Kim have a solid understanding of the program’s values and practices. The redeveloped version of INTE 5160 must be a harmonious part of the overall program, yet provide unique points not found in other courses. Thus, it is essential that this course builds upon that which is learned in other courses, but not repeat that material.B. Goals and OutcomesIn addition to the stated learning objectives, this course will teach many of the ’soft’skills that individuals need when managing ILT projects. Students will learn thisinformation while completing the assigned activities and projects, and will bereviewed on their application of both the discrete topics covered in the course andthe underlying soft skills that will ensure their success in their workplace.C. Learner Needs and Characteristics 7
    • Demographics 1. Age range: Students are at least 21 years old. The request for more specific demographic information will be presented to Brent Wilson. 2. Education levels, degrees, etc.: Students will have already earned at least a bachelor’s degree. Some may have earned more advanced degrees before their enrollment in UC Denver’s graduate program. 3. Other factors: It is possible that some users will have disabilities, including learning and/or physical disabilities such as a lack of vision. 4. Volunteer or compulsory learners: All students are compulsory, as they are required to take INTE 5160 to complete their certificate or degree program. 5. Prior experience with content: Some students will have prior experience with the content, as they may have experienced this type of activity in their workplace. The content will be diverse enough that this should not have an adverse impact, and students with prior experience will be encouraged to share that experience with the rest of the class. 6. Prior experience with technology a. Online instruction: All students will have already taken fully online courses in UC Denver’s program. They will be familiar both with the learning experience of a fully online course and the specific LMS technology used in the course. b. Internet use: All students will have a great deal of internet experience, both as students and eLearning practitioners. 7. Learning styles and skills: Students’ existing skills will prove advantageous as they move through the course, and these skills will be shared with the rest of the students through discussion forums and other in-class interaction. As all students will have already taken online courses through UCD, they will all be keenly aware of how their individual learning styles impact their experience in the course. All students will be expected to utilize various instructional methods to reach the stated goals of the course.8
    • 8. Reading level: As all students are enrolled in a graduate program, their reading level is advanced. 9. Expectations and/or assumptions: It is expected that all students will build upon the information that they’ve learned in previous courses in the ILT program. When these expectations are woven into the course, they will be explicitly stated, to provide students with opportunities to refresh their memories and skills. It is assumed that students will invest approximately 20 hours to the course per week, keeping with the standard set in the ILT program. 10. Other learner needs or characteristics: The students in the ILT program bring a great deal of varied experience to the program, and this class will ask students to share and utilize that experience. Students in the program expect all courses to be very high quality and incredibly effective, and that perspective must always be kept in mind as course materials are designed.D. Project ManagementProgram TimelineINTE 5160 will be redeveloped during the fall of 2011, and all course content will befinalized before the end of the calendar year. Specific milestones and tasks are still indevelopment, and will be presented to all of the project’s participants for finalreview.Content ExpertiseBoth Kenny and Kim have hands-on experience managing ILT projects, and thatexperience will be reflected in the course materials. This experience will besupplemented with a great deal of informative research, and that combination willfacilitate the creation of robust, relevant course materials. Patti Shank and BrentWilson are both experts in the field, and their expertise will be deeply influential onall of the course’s content.Expert Interview or Request for Assistance 9
    • The need for expert interviews and/or requests for assistance will be identified as thecontent is developed, and will occur on as as-needed basis.ApprovalsOnce all materials for the course are developed, they will be delivered to BrentWilson for final approval. Any necessary modifications will be made after he reviewsall materials.Organizational change issuesAt this time, there are no organizational change issues that should interfere with thesuccessful completion of this project.Other resource or project management issuesThe largest resource issue is time. As both Kenny and Kim are employed full-time andtaking two graduate courses at this time, the amount of time to plan and redevelopthe course is necessarily constrained. This issue will be controlled through carefulplanning, task management, and careful consideration of not allowing scope creep.E. Scope of the projectInstructional ContextSince this course will be used as part of the ILT program, the course must fit withinthe guidelines and standards utilized across the program. Technologically, this meansthat it must fit within the framework of eCollege. Pedagogically, the course mustadhere to the quality demanded of all other ILT courses. INTE 5160 will be developedusing an instructional design framework that may be different than other ILT courses,but regardless, quality principles and standards must meet with the expectations ofthe faculty and program director.Scope ConsiderationOnce all parties involved formally accept the proposed weekly outline, all contentthat is developed must adhere to that outline. Throughout the redevelopmentprocess, it will be of the utmost importance to ensure that weekly activities will takean appropriate amount of students’ time. It is essential that additional work not beadded that would exceed that threshold. It is also essential that all content remains10
    • solidly focused on the specific task or activity in the course. Additional resources maybe provided to students, but it is important that a very tangible sense of focus bemaintained throughout all aspects of the course.F. Instructional OutcomesAt this time, the weekly outline for the course has been drafted. Once the outline isformally approved, the instructional outcomes will be formalized. Table 1 containsthe proposed weekly outline and description of topics.Week TopicsWeek 1: Introduction to • Parallels between project management and instructionalProject Management for designeLearning • Environmental considerationsWeek 2: Analyze/Initiate • Reviewing & analyzing a RFP • Project initiation • Project charter • Project management triangle (Time, Budget, Scope) o Focus on scope in this week • Identifying/basics of resource managementWeek 3: Design/Plan (Part I) • Intro to resource management • Work breakdown structure (WBS)Week 4: Design/Plan (Part II) • Risk management • Change management • Quality managementWeek 5: Development & • Time managementImplementation/Execute • Working with SMEs • Stakeholder management • Vendor selection • Prototyping & formative evaluationWeek 6: Evaluate/ Monitor/ • Controlling projectsControl/Close • Monitoring/tracking projects • ROI, CEA (Cost Effectiveness Analysis), SCM (Success Case Method), LIMF (Learning Impact Measurement 11
    • Framework) • Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation • Closing strategies • Project review/reflectionWeek 7: Ethical • Instructional designer as change agentconsiderations • Business ethics • CareersWeek 8: Presentations & • Reflectionreflections • Careers in ILTTable 1. The tentative weekly outline for INTE 5160.Resource needsAt this time, the largest resource need is information. To ensure that INTE 5160 fitsinto the rest of the ILT curriculum, it is important to have an understanding of theprogram’s entire curriculum.Other instructional content issuesBecause this field is in a constant evolutionary process, it is important to keep INTE5160 updated with the most current information. It must always be reflective ofcurrent trends, so it is likely that revisions will need to be made each time the courseis offered. This type of update will prove immensely beneficial to students, who willbe presented with information that is clearly applicable and relevant in a workplacesetting.IV. DesignA. Instructional Design Model & Learning TheoryAs described in this document’s abstract, INTE 5160 is being redeveloped within aSocial Constructivist and Learner-Centered framework. The specific impacts of thatframework are described here.M. David Merrill - First Principles of Instructional DesignTask Centered approachLearners will engage in a term "whole-task" project that requires that they synthesizethe skills gained through structured group learning activities, readings, discussion and12
    • multimedia.Activation principleLearners will be required to draw upon knowledge gained in previous coursesthroughout the learning activities. Additionally, learning materials will be presentedin an elaborative manner consistent with established cognitive-based practices.Application principleThe term project will be grounded in a real-world problem relevant to each learnersenvironment, where possible. It will require that learners apply the skills andprinciples of project management and instructional design that have been gainedthrough previous coursework, self-directed research and presented course materialsas well as structured group activities. Learners will be provided a supportiveenvironment with feedback and guidance through early stages, followed byindependent elaboration and help on-demand.Integration principleLearners will be asked to select a project that is relevant to their personal or workenvironments, where possible. By asking learners to engage in real-world problemsolving, they will be motivated to engage further in integrating prior knowledge in thepursuit of a solution to a problem that has the potential for a positive impact onmultiple dimensions.B. Learning ActivitiesWeek Topics Activities DiscussionsWeek 1: • Design of this course – Group Activity: Team Forum 11: whatIntroduction show students the Agreement Assignment challenges do youto Project connection to • Create a team identity face in your work?Management effective or corporate brand [Consider assigningfor instructional design student leads to and project • Develop teameLearning agreement help guide management discussions – also, techniques lots of material • Methodologies here, maybe too1 A voicethread forum may be particularly useful for this discussion, to build a supportivelearning environment and facilitate the creation of connections among students 13
    • o Project much.] Management What do you want Institute/ to get out of the PMBOK course? § IPEMC How would o Agile/Scrum improving your PM • Parallels between PM skills benefit you? and ID Assumptions o PMBOK & Forum 2: Corporate ADDIE vs. higher education o Scrum & Rapid ILT projects Prototyping • Environmental considerations o Corporate o Higher education o K-12 (?) o Non-profit (NGO)Week 2: • How to do a close Group Activity: RFP Forum 1: How areAnalyze/ reading Assignment projects initiatedInitiate • What will an expert • Groups analyze where you work? see in a RFP that a provided RFP, prepare Forum 2: Resource novice may miss? response outlining their management in ILT • Project charter thoughts on various projects • Problem analysis aspects of RFP • Stakeholder identification Individual Project: • Project management Consultation Project triangle (Time, Budget, Proposal due Scope) • Focus on scope in this week • Identifying resources/basics of resource managementWeek 3: • Intro to Resource Group Activity - Work Forum 1:Design/Plan Management Breakdown Structure Presentation14
    • (Part I) • Work breakdown Assignment methods2 structure (WBS) • Develop a WBS chart or When is out-of-the- o Mind mapping mind map box appropriate? o Gantt charts • Develop a Gantt chart When do you go o Budgeting Individual Project: with the trend vs. traditional/tried o Roles • Initial proposal due and true method • Set context Mind mapping vs. • Problem statement WBS • Proposed Forum 2: solution/scope Cost/benefit analysis • Identify stakeholders Forum 3: BudgetingWeek 4: • Risk management Group Activity: Quality Forum 1:Design/Plan • Change management Management Assignment Communicating with(Part II) internal partners • Quality management • Prepare quality management plan for Forum 2: Dealing project outlined in with change RFP Individual Project: Consultation report dueWeek 5: • Time management Individual Project: Forum 1:Development • Working with SME • Resource plan due Communicating with& external partnersImplementati • Stakeholder • Identify roles management • With SMEson/Execute • Create timeline • Vendor selection • With stakeholders • Create WBS • Prototyping & Forum 2: • Create cost Evaluation Formative Evaluation estimate/budget techniques • Risk strategy • Incorporating • Change management feedback strategy • Keeping in mind • Quality plan scope creep issuesWeek 6: • Monitoring/Tracking Group Activity: Project Forum 1: TrackingEvaluate/ projects Management & monitoringMonitor/ Knowledgebase projects2 This forum will help to shape the students’ final presentations for the course. 15
    • Control/Close • ROI/CEA/SCM/LIMF (Borrow/extend the EL- Forum 2: Project • Kirkpatrick’s four KB) evaluation & review levels of evaluation Contribute to Forum 3: Project • Closing strategies knowledgebase in at evaluation methods least 4 categories • Project review/reflectionWeek 7: • Instructional designer Solo Project - Forum 1:Ethical as change agent • Final project plan due Instructionalconsideration • Business ethics designer as changes • Monitoring plan agent • Careers • Evaluation plan Forum 2: Ethical • ROI/CEA considerationsWeek 8: • Reflection Individual Project: Forum 1: ReflectionPresentations • Careers in ILT Project presentation due Forum 2: Careers in ILTGroup Projects 1. Groups are composed of 3-4 students. 3 group activities + team agreement assignment. 2. Each member will be project manager for one assignment. • Groups of 4 will be allowed as needed, with 3 the preferred size. • Self-reporting of participation in activities will be required.Solo ProjectConsultation project: • Students will complete a consultation in a self-chosen professional setting • Students will identify the need for an ILT project, and complete a project plan outlining their response that that project • Students will also create a short presentation for the course that will allow16
    • them to reflect on the project, the consultation, and their own learningC. Authoring Tools AssessmentOrganizational RequirementThis course will be delivered in UC Denver’s eCollege system. All of the staticmaterials for the course will be designed in Dreamweaver, as they are HTML pages,and will use images created in Photoshop.CostThere will be no direct cost for the use of any of these tools. The developers havelicenses for Dreamweaver and Photoshop.ExperienceBoth developers have a great deal of experience in both Dreamweaver and Photoshop,as well as limited experience in eCollege. Both developers have extensive LMSexperience, so adapting to the specific requirements of eCollege should not be anissue.ComplexityThe use of eCollege, Dreamweaver, and Photoshop will be the simplest way tocomplete this project. The developers’ previous experience with these tools makesthem the best choice for this project, and ensures success in the technical will be used as a tool to facilitate communication, collaboration, timemanagement and to model the effective use of online team collaboration tools.V. ReflectionContent has been developed for the course, and it presents students with acomprehensive introduction to ILT project management. The readings, activities, anddiscussions all work together to give students the opportunity to learn about project 17
    • management in a way that they will be able to immediately apply in a professionalsetting.The process of developing this course has helped us to connect everything we’velearned in the ILT program and in our professional capacities as eLearning developers.In our professional capacities, we’ve developed many courses, but neither of us haveever been the SME as well as the developer. We’ve both filled both of those roles asstudents in the ILT program, but since this is a course that will soon be filled withother graduate students, the stakes feel substantially higher. Our perception of whatthis project would be required of us was incomplete at the inception of this project,but the course redevelopment project feels successful.One of the aspects of this project that proved challenging was the distribution of workbetween the two of us. Developing a course requires paying close attention to pacingand flow, and I believe that the way we distributed the work (Kenny developed thecontent for odd weeks, and Kim developed content for even weeks) furthercomplicated that process. We are colleagues, so we communicated about the courseand its development on a very frequent basis, yet we often found that we needed theother person to complete something so that our own work could move forward. Inhindsight, it may have been more effective to split the work in a different manner.We also found that the topic of this course is so expansive that it was challenging todecide what needed to be included, and what should be left out. Projectmanagement is a huge topic, and its application to ILT projects is quite varied. Thecombination of our professional experience, Brent Wilson’s experience, and PattiShank’s advice helped to narrow the topics covered in this course. Still, it was quitechallenging to limit how much depth topics went into, and how we designed activitiesto support the learning process.The topic of ILT project management is also complicated by the fact that itnecessarily includes both hard and soft skills. In this course, we felt that it was veryimportant to emphasize both types of skills, and designing the balance between theseskills is a complicated prospect. One task that still remains to be completed in thecourse is the syllabus, so some of this balance will be achieved through the18
    • distribution of grades. Each project will ultimately have an associated rubric that willallow us to designate the relative importance of each skill or point contained in eachproject.The group work in this course will also help to combine the hard and soft skills thatstudents need in their professional capacities. Group members will have tocommunicate and collaboratively in a virtual environment, which mimics many real-world ILT projects. Groups will follow basic project management structure by creatinga team agreement (including a comprehensive communication plan) that is similar towhat is contained in a project charter. Groups will allocate work internally, and willneed to monitor and evaluate all of the work that they complete.ReferencesJonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. (1995).Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education.American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26. Routledge. Retrieved from, D. (2010, September 21). The Impact of Piagets Learning Theory on AdultEducation. Retrieved from, B.L. & Vakili, D. (2005). A Learner-Centered Framework forE-Learning. Teachers College Record Volume 107, Number 8, August 2005, pp. 1582–1600. Retrieved from, M. D. (2008). Reflections on a four decade search for effective, efficient andengaging instruction. In M. W. Allen (Ed.), Michael Allens 2008 e-Learning Annual(Vol. 1, pp. 141-167): Wiley PfiefferSmith, M.K. (2002). Jerome S. Bruner and the process of education, the encyclopediaof informal education. Retrieved from, L.S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Mind andSociety, (pp. 79-91), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 19
    • Watson, J.B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review,20(2):158-177. doi:10.1037/h007442820