This presentation advocates for one approach to integrating traditional, objectivist approaches with constructivist approaches in harmony with Cronje's Matrix (2006).

1. Kelly R. Elander, Ph.D., Harding University
Integrating teacher-centered
(objectivist) & learner-centered
(constructivist) approaches

2. Who you are?
• You teach at the college or
university level?
• You help instructors who teach
or create courses & interactions?
• You manage or maintain the
LMS/CMS for a college or
university?

3. Who you are?
•You create interactions or features
for an LMS/CMS?
• You create or manage integrations
between your LMS/CMS & other
dBs or websites?
• You manage or support the IT &
dB functions at a college or
university?

4. Who you are?
•Serving in a role similar to those
previously mention for K-12?
• A student?
• Vendor, contractor, or author?
• Others?

5. How many of you have
seen or read an article
in the past year, or month,
or week, or in the
convention program
that used the expression
“flip the classroom?”

6. “Flip the classroom?”
What are some of
the definitions or
descriptions you
have heard?

7. “Flip the classroom?”
Focus shifts to student activity rather than
instructor activity.
Students discover, gather, or experience
learning rather than receive it from
someone.
Class time is for
discussing
or processing
information

8. “Flip the classroom?”
Students are encouraged to create
their own meaning or knowledge.
Assessment is performance-
based not based on tests.

9. Why the term “flip”?
• It’s so “either / or”
• So Binary!
• It’s One or the Other
(Baby with the bathwater?)
Aretherenootherchoices?

10. Kelly R. Elander, Ph.D., Harding University
Integrating teacher-centered
(objectivist) & learner-centered
(constructivist) approaches

11. Teacher–Centered Learner–Centered
John Locke,
Skinner, Bandura
Jean Rousseau, Piaget,
John Dewey,Vygotsky
Traditional
Paradigm
New Paradigm
(Jonassen, 1991)
Objectivist Constructivist
Instructivist Student-Centered /
Experiential
Positivist Subjectivist
Two Philosophies –Two Approaches

12. Two Philosophies –Two Approaches

13. Researcher and educator Dr. Johannes Cronjé (2006)
questioned the traditional view of objectivism &
constructivism (in learning) as opposites on a
continuum or that the “constructivist-only” approach
is always best. Cronjé instead saw the approaches in an
orthogonal relationship (i.e., axes at 90 degree angles
to one another) forming a matrix.
Cronjé’s Model

14. 4 Quadrants for Integrating Approaches
Cronjé’s model (2006) of the new relationship may potentially illustrate
all the types of instructional courses that could be formed when
integrating objectivist and constructivist approaches.

15. Cronjé’s (2006) new perspective on the relationship
between objectivist & constructivist approaches in
instruction could potentially transform current theory & address
the concerns & experience of practitioners.
In fact a few researchers have started identifying models, &
frameworks to guide the integration of these two approaches to
capitalize on the strengths of each (Antle &Wise, 2013; Charles,
2014; Cronjé, 2006;Tangworakitthaworn, Gilbert, & Wills, 2011;
Yanchar, South,Williams, & Wilson, 2008).
Integrating the Approaches

16. Apparently there is some resistance & rejection of current
theory by practitioners who have observed that constructivist
approaches alone are inadequate, at least in certain
situations (Chen, 2007; Harasim, 2012; Johnson, 2009; Reigeluth,
1992; Spiro & DeSchryver, 2009).The result is some educators &
instructional designers have disregarded accepted theory &
methods, opting instead to use whatever approach works best
with the topic (Christensen, 2008;Yanchar & Gabbitas, 2011;
Yanchar, South,Williams, & Wilson, 2008).

17. I conducted an inquiry into which objectivist &
constructivist elements are being used in
integrated courses & which of these elements
are being used most often.
I also looked for patterns and combinations
of objectivist and constructivist elements matched
in integrated courses.The courses reported will be
plotted on Cronjé’s matrix (2006). Finally, a
chi-square contingency table analysis will verify
whether the results are significant.

18. How are instructional designers integrating
objectivist & constructivist elements in college &
university courses?
Cronjé’s matrix (2006), & its underlying model, suggested that
objectivist & constructivist learning approaches could be
combined in at least four (4) combinations.
If combinations were found in the different combinations those
results be significant?
Ho1:The results plotted in the four quadrants of
Cronjé’s matrix (2006) will not significantly differ.

19. Cronjé’s (2006) model proposes that objectivism &
constructivism are NOT polar opposites on a
continuum, as many have assumed & declared
(Johnson,2009; Jonassen, 1991; Khan & Nawaz, 2010;
Vrasidas, 2000), but instead are axes that form a matrix.
Cronjé’s ideas (2006) may in fact explain why & how objectivist
& constructivist elements may be combined in instructional
designs for the best results.

20. Qualified instructional designers, course developers,
professors & instructors (who designed their own courses)
responded to 26 statements about learning approaches
& concepts used in their courses.
Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement
or disagreement with each statement about the way the
course was developed.
For example, if the designer feels that the instructor directed
the learning about half the time & the learners directed their
own learning half the time, the participant might click on ‘To
Some Extent’ to both the objectivist & the constructivist
statement.

21. Statement
0
Never
1
To Some
Extent
2
To a Great
Extent
3
Always
Learners create case
studies individually
X
Learners create case
studies in groups
X
Example. Let’s say in your course the learners create four case
studies. Two times learners create studies as individuals and the
other two times they create studies in groups. Thus, if something
occurs 50% of the time or less you indicate “To Some Extent.” If the
practices happen between 51% -90% of the time, you would mark
“To a Great Extent” and if that situation takes place 91-100% of the
time, you would mark “Always.” If something occurs 10% of the time
or less, mark “Never.”
In the course I developed,

22. Since ‘To Some Extent’ is valued at one point
(+1), the online Objectivist & Constructivist
Integration Assessment (OCIA) survey would
record an objectivist score of one point (1) AND
a constructivist score of one point (1) for the
pair of statements.
The online system tabulates scores throughout
the survey to produce an overall objectivist
total & likewise an overall constructivist
total.

24. Pilot Results Main Study Results
Results plotted on Cronjé’s Matrix reveals
make-up of Integrated Courses

26. 5crucial dimensions in any learning.
 Pre-existing & emerging information (foundational &
central concepts)
 Learner engagement with learning & information
 Learner processing of new information
 Learner application of new information
 Expert thinking (problem-solving) use of the information
Intentionally integrating teacher-
& learner-centered approaches

27. Five Key Components
in Instruction
1. Pre-existing & emerging
information. (foundational &
central concepts)
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
3. Learner processing of new
information
4. Learner application of new
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM254)
2. Learner engagement with learning &
information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information. (foundational & central
concepts)
3. Learner processing of the information
5. Expert thinking related to the topic
4. Learner application of the information
Integrated Approach Used

28. .
Starting with Motivation & Engagement
–
Integrated Approach Used
Keller’s ARCS Model
Attention
Relevance
Confidence
Satisfaction

29. .
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information.(foundational &
central concepts)
3. Learner processing of new
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
4. Learner application of new
information
Blended Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners select
the topics most relevant to their future career
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links, videos,
PPTs, materials, lecture) in each topic.
3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/
a partner, team, and/or the class) for learners
to process information.
5.Teacher facilitates a discussion, prompting
critical thinking related to the topic.
4. Learners create a project deliverable
summarizing topic information.
Integrated Approach Used

30. This first element
was handled by
sending students
a link to an
online, pre-
course survey to
select topics for
the ComM254
Internet
Communication
course.
Integrated Approach Used

31. .
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information.(foundational &
central concepts)
3. Learner processing of new
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
4. Learner application of new
information
Blended Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners select
the topics most relevant to their future career
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links, videos,
PPTs, materials, lecture) in each topic.
3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/
a partner, team, and/or the class) for learners
to process information.
5.Teacher facilitates a discussion, prompting
critical thinking related to the topic.
4. Learners create a project deliverable
summarizing topic information.
Integrated Approach Used

32. The teacher selects a couple of foundational
topics to prepare learners for learner-centered
activities and topics.
Online Research
Critical
Thinking
Integrated Approach Used

33. LMS Used in ComM254
The LMS isn’t as
important as the
kinds of learning
experiences and
interactions we want
to create.

34. Topics have the final assignment instructions &
an explanation of the suggested method(s)
to tackle the topic.
Integrated Approach Used

35. There is a three
part approach
& rubric for
each topic. The
details of the
approach may
differ from
topic-to-topic.
Rubric Used in ComM254

36. .
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement
with learning & information
1. Pre-existing and
emerging information.
(foundational & central
concepts)
3. Learner processing of
new information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
4. Learner application of
new information
Blended Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners select
the topics most relevant to their future career
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links, videos,
PPTs, materials, lecture) in each topic.
3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/
a partner, team, and/or the class) for learners
to process information.
5.Teacher facilitates a discussion, prompting
critical thinking related to the topic.
4. Learners create a project deliverable
summarizing topic information.
Integrated Approach Used

37. After discussing the final assignment &
suggested methods — readings, articles,
websites, videos, tools, & other materials are
provided to jumpstart the learner’s research.
Student-centered Learning
Environments (Land &
Hannafin)
Constructivist Learning
Environments (Jonassen)
Integrated Approach Used

38. .
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information.(foundational &
central concepts)
3. Learner processing of new
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
4. Learner application of new
information
Blended Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners select
the topics most relevant to their career
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links, videos,
PPTs, materials, lecture) in each topic.
3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/
a partner, team, and/or the class) for learners
to process information.
5.Teacher facilitates a discussion, prompting
critical thinking related to the topic.
4. Learners create a project deliverable
summarizing topic information.
Integrated Approach Used

39. The discussion component may take many forms.
• Live class discussion
• Discussions in small groups
• A class activity to collect & organize ideas,
such as a mind map or lists.
• Online forums
Integrated Approach Used

40. Some topics may have two or more discussion
sessions – one to process research findings &
then another to further analyze & classify
information learned.
The teacher often facilitates these discussions and
tries to stir critical thinking and questions.
Techniques may include
• Socratic questions
• Requests for further explanation
• Q & A following a student presentation.
Integrated Approach Used

41. .
Components Reordered in
Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information.(foundational &
central concepts)
3. Learner processing of new
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
4. Learner application of new
information
Blended Internet Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners select
the topics most relevant to their future career
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links, videos,
PPTs, materials, lecture) in each topic.
3. Each topic has a discussion component (w/
a partner, team, and/or the class) for learners
to process information.
5.Teacher facilitates a discussion, prompting
critical thinking related to the topic.
4. Learners create a project deliverable
summarizing topic information.
Integrated Approach Used

42. .
The final assignment is a project or presentation
designed to permit learners to show their
understanding of the topic.
Integrated Approach Used

43. By rotating (or integrating) approaches
instructors can choose their role anywhere
on a spectrum from total direction to no
direction. The rotated classroom can be
done offline, online, or as a blend.
Rotating the Classroom
(Integrating Approaches)
Techniques could combine :
•Game-based learning
• Project-based learning
• Collaborative problem-solving
• Simulations
• Cognitive Apprenticeship

44. Rotate the classroom

46. Antle, A.N., & Wise, A.F. (2013) Getting down to details: Using
theories of cognition and learning to inform tangible user
interface design. Interacting with Computers, 25(2), 1-20.
doi:10.1093/iwc/iws007
Charles, J.M. (2014) Constructivism, direct instruction, and the
Free-energy Optimization Principle: Cognitive perspectives
on learning. CanadianJournal for New Scholars in Education,
5(2), 31-38.
Cronjé, J. C. (2006). Paradigms regained:Toward integrating
objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and
learning sciences. EducationalTechnology, Research and
Development, 54(4), 387-416. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9605-1

47. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism vs. constructivism: Do we need
a new paradigm? EducationalTechnology Research and
Development, 39(3), 5-14. doi: 10.1007/BF02296434
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 5thWorld Summit on the Knowledge Society,
Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/273230

48. 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
andTechnology.

49. kelander@harding.edu
Interest areas:
 Integrating Objectivist &Constructivist
Learning Approaches
 eCollaboration in E-learning
 Instructor Presence in E-learning
 Motivation in learning

51. Christensen (2008), Katz (1999), Moallem (2001), andYanchar,
South,Williams, Allen, andWilson (2010) have all reported the
situation of instructional designers and other educational
practitioners choosing not to consistently adhere to prevailing
theoretical approaches; instead adopting more eclectic or
pragmatic approaches of selecting methods that work
best for a particular instructional situation.

54. Constructivist.
Constructivist is used as a descriptive term to reflect aspects of the
Constructivist philosophy including a subjectivist or interpretivist
View of knowledge & how it is created & formulated in the mind of
another person (Bellefeuille, 2006; Harasim,2012). Constructivists
tend to have a relativist view of existence & reality (Duffy &
Jonassen, 1992). In learning, constructivists are associated with
progressive concepts such as learner-centered, personalized
knowledge that is unique to individual & their perception (Powell &
Kalina,2009). Constructivists hold that knowledge cannot be
transmitted, but can be cultivated in individuals as they undergo
new experiences, processes, authentic tasks, & environments that
help learners create their own understanding of a subject, building
upon prior experience (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992; Harasim, 2012).

55. Construction quadrant.
The construction quadrant contains courses dominated by
constructivist elements.This quadrant could include cognitive or
social constructivist courses, constructivist environments, situated
learning, & cognitive apprenticeships.
Injection quadrant.
The injection quadrant contains courses entirely objectivist or
dominated by objectivist elements. Injection quadrant courses
most closely resemble traditional instructivism, in which “body of
human knowledge” (Johnson, 2009, p. 14) is provided & presented
to learners (Cronjé, 2006; Cunningham & Allen, 2010).

56. Immersion quadrant.
The immersion quadrant encompasses learning situations that are
low in both constructivist & objectivist elements (Cronjé,2006;
Cunningham & Allen, 2010).This quadrant encompasses self-
initiated, self-directed learning that is also low in direction & low in
social construction.The immersion quadrant holds the potential to
explain how informal learning (Jonassen, 2009), “incidental
learning” (Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010, p. 39), & connectivism fit
into a relationship with the objectivist & constructivist approaches.
Integration quadrant.
The integration quadrant contains courses that are high in both
objectivist & constructivist elements.The learning approaches in
this quadrant use objectivist & constructivist elements together in
the same course, in a complementary fashion.

57. Objectivist.
The descriptive term objectivist refers to the way something or
someone reflects positivist views of the nature of knowledge &
how it is created & formulated in the mind of another person
(Chen, 2003). Objectivists generally have a realist view of reality
& existence (Cunningham & Allen, 2010). In learning, objectivists
are associated with traditional concepts that knowledge is
external to the individual & finite (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992;
Harasim, 2012). Objectivists hold that knowledge can be
identified, categorized & sequentially ordered for transmission
to another person, who can reassemble the information in their
mind into a construct that resembles the knowledge of the
presenter (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992).

58. The literature has shown that some educators, instructional designers,
course developers, and educators are consciously breaking from
accepted theory and research-based practice in their instruction because
they feel the constructivist-only approach is inadequate to handle all
instructional applications (Christensen, 2008; Gilbert, 2009; Johnson,
2004, 2009; Reigeluth, 1992;Yanchar et al., 2010).Additionally, a number
of articles have shown instructors and course developers talking more
about vacillating back and forth, picking either an objectivist and
constructivist approach based on the needs of that particular course
(Christensen, 2008; Lan & Sie, 2010; Pollalis & Mavrommatis, 2008;
Vernadakis et al., 2011). Evidence also exists that some instructional
designers, course developers, and instructors who develop their own
courses are intentionally integrating objectivist and constructivist
elements within a single course in an effort to help learners more fully
grasp the subject (Alonso et al., 2009;Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2006;
Bellefeuille, 2006; Chen, 2007; Cronjé, 2006; Johnson, 2009; Kinchin et
al., 2009; Marcum, 2008; Nie & Lau, 2010; Santoso et al., 2006;Wright,
2008).

59.  Will there be courses reported integrating objectivist
and constructivist elements?
 Will there be integrated courses reported with a more
constructivist-orientation, fitting the construction
quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
 Will there be integrated courses reported with a more
objectivist-orientation, fitting the injection quadrant
of Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
 Will there be integrated courses reported where
objectivist and constructivist approaches are being
used equally, fitting the integration quadrant of
Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?

60. Questions Explanation
Where do integrated courses cluster within the
Construction quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000,
2006)?
The Construction quadrant, explained in the definition of terms section to follow, contains
courses that employ more constructivist characteristics than objectivist characteristics. The
plotting of courses in the Construction quadrant is based on numerical scoring of responses
on a Likert scale that show a greater use of constructivist learning elements in the course.
Where do integrated courses cluster
within the Injection quadrant of
Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
The Injection quadrant, explained in the definition of terms, contains
courses that employ more objectivist characteristics than constructivist
characteristics.These courses reflect the report of more objectivist
elements being used and, or, objectivist elements being used more of the
time.
Where do integrated courses cluster
within the Integration quadrant of
Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)
The Integration quadrant, explained below, contains courses that employ
more of an even balance between objectivist and constructivist
characteristics.The combination objectivist and constructivist elements
may vary from course to course, but the overall orientation of the course
will reflect a good measure of each approach.
Where do integrated courses cluster
within the Immersion quadrant of
Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)? (Note:
Few of these are expected in a
university setting.)
The Immersion quadrant, explained below, will contain courses that use
very few objectivist and constructivist characteristics, or use them less
frequently.This type of learning would fall more in line with the spirit of
self-directed learning or independent study.

61.  Where do the integrated courses cluster within the
Construction quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000,
2006)?
 Where do the integrated courses cluster within the
Injection quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
 Where do the integrated courses cluster within the
Integration quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
 Where do the integrated courses cluster within the
Immersion quadrant of Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)?
(Note: Few of these are expected in a university
setting.)

62.  Which constructivist elements are being used in
integrated courses?
 Which objectivist elements are being used in integrated
courses?
 Which constructivist elements are being used most often
in integrated courses?
 Which objectivist elements are being used most often in
integrated courses?
 What patterns and matching combinations of objectivist
and constructivist elements will be found in integrated
courses?

 Were courses more objectivist or more constructivist in
orientation?

63.  Comparing overall objectivist and constructivist
survey scores from the sum of ordinal responses
to objectivist-oriented statements and
constructivist-oriented statements (never = 0, to
always = 3).
 Frequency counts
 Descriptive statistics
 Cross-tabulation, comparison and meta-analysis
 Plotting courses in Cronjé’s matrix (2000, 2006)
 A Chi-square statistical analysis will be used to
determine the significant difference between the
results reported in the four quadrants ofCronjé’s
matrix (2000, 2006)

64. Courses Major
General Psychology or Psychology 101 Psychology
Microbiology Nursing
Public Speaking or Speech 101 Communication
Data Structures Computer Science
Introduction to Teaching Education
Macro Economics or Micro Economics Business
Basic Biology or Biology 101 Biology

65. Statement 0
Never
1
To Some
Extent
2
To a Great
Extent
3
Always
1. The instructor is perceived as
the authority figure and source of
information on the subject.
2. The instructor is a support and
additional source of information
among many available to the
learners.
Figure 3. Sample Pairing Statements on the OCIA Survey

66. Pilot Results Main Study Results
Research Into Whether Approaches
Were being Combined in Higher Ed

67. Sub-questions Explanation
Which constructivist elements are
being used in integrated courses?
The Web survey used will ask participants whether they agree with statements about the planning
and approach used in courses. Statements will include examples of constructivist characteristics
(listed in Table 3). The answers should reveal whether constructivist elements are being used. If
some objectivist characteristics are also being used, to a lesser degree, the course will be considered
a constructivist- oriented integrated course.
Which objectivist elements are
being used in integrated courses?
The participants will indicate levels of agreement with statements about the presence of objectivist
characteristics (listed in Table 2) in the course. The answers should reveal whether objectivist
elements are being used. If some constructivist characteristics are also being used, to a lesser
degree, the course will be considered an objectivist- oriented integrated course.
Which constructivist elements are
being used most often in integrated
courses?
The data collected should permit comparisons of answers between surveys as well as within each
survey. For example, it might be determined that the majority of integrated courses are all using
group activities and collaboration.
Which objectivist elements are
being used most often in integrated
courses?
Comparisons of responses between surveys may reveal trends and general practices. For example,
if a group of constructivist-oriented integrated courses are compared, it might turn out that the
majority of the courses do not use scaffolding, instead opting for direct guidance and feedback
throughout instruction.
What patterns and matching
combinations of objectivist and
constructivist elements will be
found in integrated courses?
Just as some objectivist or constructivist elements may be used more often, it might be expected
that certain combinations of objectivist and constructivist elements may be used, repeatedly, across
the pool of integrated courses. As the survey results are analyzed from multiple angles, any
patterns of element use should emerge.
What patterns and matching
combinations of objectivist and
constructivist elements will be
found in integrated courses?
Just as some objectivist or constructivist
Were courses more objectivist or
more constructivist in orientation?
The Web survey tool in this study will assign a value score to each response selected (based on a
scale measuring the level of frequency that a characteristic occurs, see Appendix C). For each set of
statements, there will be an objectivist score and a constructivist score. The survey will produce an
overall objectivist and an overall constructivist score. If either score is more than 50 %, that