Elander2013 colloquium3 18_13final2

343 views

Published on

Harding University professor Dr. Kelly Elander presents of Academic, Higher Education, blended course design that combines (integrates) objectivist / instructivist methods with constructivist learning methods for better learning and critical thinking.

Published in: Education, Spiritual
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
343
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Elander2013 colloquium3 18_13final2

  1. 1. INTEGRATING TEACHER-CENTERED (OBJECTIVIST) AND LEARNERCENTERED (CONSTRUCTIVIST) APPROACHES AND THEIR INFLUENCES ON DESIGNING INSTRUCTION by Kelly R. Elander
  2. 2. Agenda My background  My dissertation and theoretical backgrounds  Problems  Cronje’s model  The two approaches/philosophies   Objectivist Learning Characteristics  Constructivist Learning Characteristics  Designing teacher- and learner-centered combined approaches
  3. 3. Problem Issues From Research The literature revealed that some instructional designers, course developers, and educators were consciously breaking from accepted theory and research-based practice in their instruction because they felt the constructivist-only approach was inadequate to handle all their instructional applications. (Christensen, 2008; Gilbert, 2009; Johnson, 2004, 2009; Reigeluth, 1992; Yanchar et al., 2010) A number of instructional designers, course developers, and educators were pragmatically picking either an objectivist or constructivist approach based on the needs of a particular course. (Christensen, 2008; Lan & Sie, 2010; Pollalis & Mavrommatis, 2008; Vernadakis et al., 2011) However, a few instructional designers, course developers, and instructors were exploring intentionally integrating objectivist and constructivist elements within a single course in an effort to help learners more fully grasp the subject. (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2006; Chen, 2007; Cronjé, 2006; Johnson, 2009;Marcum, 2008; Nie & Lau, 2010; Wright, 2008)
  4. 4. Two Philosophies – Two Approaches Teacher–Centered John Locke, Skinner Traditional (Gagne, Bloom) Objectivist Instructivist Learner--Centered Jean Rousseau, John Dewey New Paradigm (Piaget, Jonassen) Constructivist Student-Centered/ Experiential
  5. 5. Cronje’s Model Researcher and educator Dr. Johannes Cronje questioned the viewpoint that sees objectivism & constructivism as opposites on a continuum in learning or that the “constructivistonly” approach is always best. Cronje chose to see the approaches in an orthogonal relationship (i.e., axes at 90 degree Cronjé’s model of the new relationship may potentially illustrate angles to one another) the types of instructional courses that could be formed when forming a matrix. integrating objectivist and constructivist approaches.
  6. 6. Cronje’s Model Researcher and educator Dr. Johannes Cronje questioned the viewpoint that sees objectivism & constructivism as opposites on a continuum in learning or that the “constructivistonly” approach is always best. Cronje chose to see the approaches in an orthogonal relationship (i.e., axes at 90 degree Cronjé’s model of the new relationship may potentially illustrate angles to one another) the types of instructional courses that could be formed when forming a matrix. integrating objectivist and constructivist approaches.
  7. 7. Results Plotted on Cronje Matrix Pilot Results Main Study Results
  8. 8. Integrating the Approaches This new perspective on the relationship between objectivist and constructivist approaches in instruction could potentially transform current theory and address the concerns of practitioners. A few other researchers have started identifying models, and frameworks to guide the integration of these two approaches to capitalize on the strengths of each: Antle & Wise, 2013; Tangworakitthaworn, Gilbert, & Wills, 2011; Yanchar, South, Williams, & Wilson, 2008.
  9. 9. Teacher-Centered Characteristics Learning Characteristics Literature Support Knowledge is a hierarchy of facts, concepts, principles, and skills. Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti, Jarke, & Specht, 2010; Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Hargis, 2001; Jonassen, 1991; Phillips, et al., 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 Objective truths exist Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et al., 2010; independent of a learner’s Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Hargis, 2001; understanding. Jonassen, 1991; Phillips, et al., 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 The instructor is considered an Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Kang, Brian, & Ricca, authority and expert on a subject. 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009 The instructor should be the primary provider of information and guidance. Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007; Puntai, 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 The transfer of knowledge is Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et al., 2010; primarily through one-way Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., communication from instructor to 2010; Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Kundi & learner. Nawaz, 2010; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
  10. 10. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics The instructor or instructional designer determine the sequence of topics, tasks, activities, projects, deadlines, and exercises to solve. Literature Support Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007; Puntai, 2007 The learner is primarily a passive recipient of Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et knowledge, waiting to be filled. al., 2010; Jonassen, 1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 Information is delivered by lecture, presentation, demonstration, repetition, and or reinforcement. Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007 Information is delivered without a clear Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Puntai, 2007 understanding of a learner’s prior knowledge of that specific subject. Learners are motivated externally with Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; prompts such as recognition, rewards, and Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 punishment.
  11. 11. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics Literature Support The instructor is expected to provide instructions, prompts, and feedback throughout the learning. Facts, concepts, and principles are presented in an organized, logical sequence, or pattern that helps learners memorize the information. Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007 Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007; Puntai, 2007 Learners are presented information in an Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, efficient, focused setting for receiving 1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Phillips, et information such as an instructor-centered, al., 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 academic classroom, or classroom-patterned learning environment Instructors or instructional designers organize and structure information content in logical, memorable sequences, and patterns for clear comprehension and recall. Chatti et al., 2010; Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Puntai, 2007; Phillips, et al., 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 Subjects should be presented in increments Chatti et al., 2010; Ertmer & Newby, from simple to complex 1993; Merrill, 2009
  12. 12. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics Literature Support Instructors should provide a well-planned, orderly, and controlled learning environment Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009;Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 The instructor or learning designer sets learning goals and objectives based on the hierarchy of information in the subject matter Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Phillips, et al., 2007;Puntai, 2007;Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010 Learners are expected to adopt and assimilate Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Ertmer a conceptual knowledge set and structure & Newby, 1993; Hargis, 2001 resembles that of the instructor or instructional designer. Learners process knowledge by review, study, Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Kundi & and memorization of facts as organized by the Nawaz, 2010; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; instructor Hargis, 2001; Merrill, 2009 Learners is assessed by measuring learners’ attainment of predetermined objectives or outcomes Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Puntai, 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
  13. 13. Learner-Centered Characteristics Learning Characteristics Literature Support Knowledge is a personal understanding of a subject formed in the mind of a learner as a result of the learner’s exploration and experience. Anderson & Dron, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009; Cobb, 1994; Cooper, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kang, Brian, & Ricca, 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 Truth and knowledge are personal constructs of a learner, dependent upon the learner. Anderson & Dron, 2011; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cobb, 1994; Cooper, 1993; Fosnot,1989; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Rovai, Ponton, & Baker, 2008 The instructor is a support and additional source of information among many available to the learners. Anderson & Dron, 2011; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Jonassen, 1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 Learners should discover, extract, or create their own information and learning strategies. Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cooper, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010
  14. 14. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics Literature Support Knowledge creation occurs through Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran, collaboration and social exchange 2009; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009; with mentors and fellow learners. Cobb, 1994; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Rovai et al., 2008 Learners are empowered to Anderson & Dron, 2011; Badrinarayanan, 2011; determine their own projects, tasks, Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 activities, deadlines, and problems to tackle. Learners are active constructors of Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran, their knowledge, taking the lead in 2009; Clark, 2009; Cooper, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; investigations and inquiry. Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Spiro, Coulson, Fentovich, & Anderson, 1988 Learners discover information by Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Baviskar et al., investigating or exploring 2009; Cobb, 1994; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, resources with the help of peers 2009; Rovai et al., 2008 and mentors. Learners build their own new Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran, understanding based upon prior 2009; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009; knowledge and experience with the Fosnot,1989; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; specific subject. Merrill, 2009
  15. 15. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics Literature Support Learners motivate themselves internally, with personal goals, aspirations, and concerns. Clark, 2009; Cooper, 1993 Instructor guidance is initially provided, then phased out as learners guide themselves. Clark, 2009; Harasim, 2012; Rovai et al., 2008 Learners gather knowledge from multiple forms or representations of information, in various ways to construct their own mental schemas. Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Fosnot, 1989; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010; Spiro et al., 1988 Opportunities are provided for learners to try tasks in realistic or nearly realistic contexts to acquire necessary skills under the supervision of mentors, much like an apprenticeship. Anderson & Dron, 2011; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Clark, 2009; Cobb, 1994; Jonassen, 1991; Merrill, 2009 Learners build knowledge upon previous Baviskar et al., 2009;Kang et al., experience and discover processes to accomplish 2010 their goals, resulting in a deeper grasp of concepts needed to face future challenges.
  16. 16. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont) Learning Characteristics Learners are provided a learner-centered environment in which learners can access resources in any order as they explore the topic. Learners are to construct their own personalized understanding of the subject after exploring ideas and collaborating with other learners. Learners set their own goals as they attempt to tackle realistic tasks or solve problems related to the subject matter. Learners create meaning by reflecting upon their own experiences, evidence, and processes used to accomplish learning tasks. Learning is assessed by observing the learner’s ability to perform the authentic thinking and tasks needed in the context. Literature Support Jonassen, 1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010 Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cobb, 1994; Fosnot,1989; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009; Rovai et al., 2008 Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Cooper, 1993 Anderson & Dron, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009; Cooper, 1993; Fosnot,1989; Merrill, 2009 Badrinarayanan, 2011; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Kurt, 2011 Learners demonstrate knowledge by being able Badrinarayanan, 2011; Duffy & to use the kind of thinking and processes Cunningham, 1996; Kang et al., needed to accomplish a task. 2010; Kurt, 2011
  17. 17. Combining Approaches To combine teacher- and learner-centered approaches, consider the requirements of five dimensions of learning:  Pre-existing and emerging information.(foundational and central concepts)  Learner engagement with learning & information  Learner processing of the information  Learner application of the information  Expert thinking (problem-solving) use of the information
  18. 18. Approach Used in ComM 254 Five Key Components in Instruction Components Reordered in Internet Communication (ComM254) 1. Pre-existing and emerging information (foundational and central concepts). 2. Learner engagement with learning & information 2. Learner engagement with learning & information 1. Pre-existing and emerging information. (foundational & central concepts) 3. Learner processing of the information 4. Learner application of the information 5. Expert thinking related to the topic 3. Learner processing of the information 5. Expert thinking related to the topic 4. Learner application of the
  19. 19. Approach Used in ComM 254 . Starting with Motivation & Engagement
  20. 20. Approach Used in ComM 254 . This first element was handled by sending students a link to an online, pre-course survey to select topics for the Internet Communication (ComM 254) course.
  21. 21. Approach Used in ComM 254 The teacher selects a couple of foundational . topics to set the stage for learner-centered topics throughout the course. Online Research Critical Thinking
  22. 22. Approach Used in ComM 254 The typical topic will have the final assignment instructions and an explanation of the suggested method to tackle the topic.
  23. 23. Approach Used in ComM 254 There is a three-part approach and rubric for each topic. The details of the approach may differ from topic to topic.
  24. 24. Approach Used in ComM 254 After establishing the final assignment and suggested methods, readings, articles, Websites, videos, tools, and other materials are provided to start the learner’s research.
  25. 25. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED Components Reordered in Internet Communication (ComM 254) 2. Learner engagement with learning & information Blended Internet Communication . (ComM 254) 2. Pre-course online survey - learners select the topics most relevant to their future career 1. Pre-existing and 1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical emerging information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a research component (provided links, central concepts) videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each 3. Learner processing of topic. the information 3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/ 5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for the topic learners 4. Learner application of to process information.
  26. 26. Approach Used in ComM 254 The discussion component may take many forms: • Live class discussion, • Discussions in smaller groups, • A class activity to collect and organize ideas, such as a mind map or generating lists. • Online forums
  27. 27. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED Components Reordered in Internet Communication (ComM 254) 2. Learner engagement with learning & information Blended Internet Communication . (ComM 254) 2. Pre-course online survey - learners select the topics most relevant to their future career 1. Pre-existing and 1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical emerging information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a research component (provided links, central concepts) videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each 3. Learner processing of topic. the information 3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/ 5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for the topic learners 4. Learner application of to process information.
  28. 28. Approach Used in ComM 254 Some topics may have two discussion sessions – one to process research findings and then another to further analyze and classify information learned. The teacher often facilitates these discussions and tries to stir critical thinking and questions. Techniques include: • Socratic questions • Requests for further explanation • Q & A following a student presentation
  29. 29. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED Components Reordered in Internet Communication (ComM 254) 2. Learner engagement with learning & information Blended Internet Communication . (ComM 254) 2. Pre-course online survey - learners select the topics most relevant to their future career 1. Pre-existing and 1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical emerging information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a research component (provided links, central concepts) videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each 3. Learner processing of topic. the information 3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/ 5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for the topic learners 4. Learner application of to process information.
  30. 30. Approach Used in ComM 254 The final assignment is a project or presentation . designed to permit learners to show their understanding of the topic.
  31. 31. ANY QUESTIONS?
  32. 32. REFERENCES Antle, A.N., & Wise, A.F. (2013) Getting down to details: Using theories of cogniton and learning to inform tangible user interface design. Interacting with Computers, 25(2), 1-20. doi:10.1093/iwc/iws007 Cronjé, J. C. (2006). Paradigms regained: Toward integrating objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and learning sciences. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 54(4), 387-416. doi:10.1007/s11423-0069605-1 Tangworakitthaworn, P., Gilbert, L., & Wills, G. (2011, November). Towards a Matching Strategy of Constructivism and Instructionism. Paper submitted to the 19th International Conference on Computers in Education, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Retrieved from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/22598/ Tangworakitthaworn, P., Gilbert, L.,& Wills, G. (2012, June). An Equivalent Architecture of Learner's and Instructor's Knowledge through the Matching of Intended Learning Outcome. Paper submitted to the 5th World Summit on the Knowledge Society, Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/273230 Yanchar, S. C., South, J. B., Williams, D. D., & Wilson, B. G. (2008). How do instructional designers use theory? A qualitative-developmental study of the integration of theory and technology. In M. R. Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings of selected research and development presentations (pp. 331-337). Washington DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
  33. 33. ANY QUESTIONS?
  34. 34. CRONJÉ’S MATRIX

×