1) The document discusses constructivism as a learning theory where learners actively construct their own understanding through experiences rather than knowledge being passively transmitted. 2) It links constructivism to Knowles' theory of andragogy which focuses on adult learners being self-directed with a wealth of prior experiences to draw from. 3) The document evaluates how one stage ("Reflect") of an online instructional design model ("IPSARRET") used by the company could incorporate constructivist learning principles for postgraduate adult learners.

1. Examining constructivism through an online instructional
design model when delivering learning to adult learners
Introduction
In realising my goal of practising as a critically informed instructional designer at the
eLearning development company Trinity Online Services Ltd (TOS Ltd.), the pragmatic
translation of learning theory into ‘verified instructional strategies and techniques for
facilitating learning’ (Ertmer & Newby, 1993) is a key interest of mine. This effective
delivery of instruction through an online environment and having an awareness of the
learning needs of the postgraduate adult learner - the company’s primary student group – is
central to this professional development process.
Mayer (2011, p. 32) proposes that learning involves ‘a change in the learner’s knowledge due
to experience’. Indeed, learners actively making sense of their own experiences to ‘construct’
an understanding - evolving knowledge, skills, beliefs or behaviors (Schunk, 2012) - underlie
both the principles of adult learning and constructivist learning theory.
Considering this statement, I will first give a brief overview of constructivism. I will then link
the principles of constructivist learning theory to Knowles characteristics of andragogy with
the aim of understanding the adult learner and the associated implications for instruction.
Subsequently, I will critically discuss relevant aspects of constructivist learning theory in the
context of TOS Ltd.’s online eight-stage instructional design model, ‘IPSARRET’. This is
done by evaluating the effectiveness of the applied instruction and technology tool in a single
stage of the model – the Reflect stage - in delivering meaningful constructivist learning
experiences to the postgraduate learner.
Constructivism – an overview
Constructivism alongside behaviourism and cognitivism form a triad of influential learning
theories which explore the processes of knowledge acquisition.
While behaviourists equate learning with observable change underpinned by positive and
negative reinforcement, with motivation and mental processes considered unimportant

2. 1
(Jordan, Carlile, & Stack, 2008); cognitivists describe learning as a mental activity that
entails the process of external stimuli being encoded, structured and retrieved by the learner
(Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Both theories are didactic in approach and have relevant
instruction to facilitate learning as proposed by Ertmer and Newby (1993). However, each
has been criticised, with the ‘response-strengthening’ view of behaviourism not creating
meaningful learning, and the information-acquisition view of cognitivism lacking
psychological engagement, with the ‘learners mind seen as an empty vessel into which the
instructor pours information’ (Clark & Mayer, 2016).
This view of knowledge as something external and imposed on the learner contrasts with
constructivism, a group of theories which focus on ‘a philosophical view on how we come to
understand or know’ (Savery & Duffy, 1996).
The learner actively ‘constructs’ their own meaning
According to constructivists an individual actively ‘constructs’ their own meaning by
building on and reorganising prior knowledge and understanding in an effort to make sense of
their personal and subjective world experiences (Carlile & Jordan, 2005; Yiasemina &
Loizos, 2005).
The constructivist view is that knowledge cannot be imposed or transferred intact from one
mind to another (Carlile & Jordan, 2005; Yiasemina & Loizos, 2005); rather it is an adaptive
process. As proposed by Piaget, there is a need to accommodate new information when it
cannot be assimilated within existing mental schemas or ‘constructs’ (Miller, 2010). This
cognitive ‘conflict’ can be viewed as a stimulus, causing a learner to ‘reconsider and
reconfigure’ existing or different mental constructs (Jordan et al., 2008; Savery & Duffy,
1996).
Underpinning this process are influential personal filters such as life experiences, goals,
curiosities and beliefs (Yiasemina & Loizos, 2005). These along with life challenges drive
motivation to find the meaning in different situations.
Learning is a collaborative process
The construction of knowledge does not evolve in isolation, as may be implied by ‘trivial’
constructivism, but critically through collaborative processes of social negotiation in the

3. 2
context of our shared environment as proposed by researchers like Vygotsky and Bandura
(Jordan et al., 2008; Savery & Duffy, 1996). Social constructivism emphasises how social
and cultural worlds shape how individuals perceive, interpret and connect meaning to
experiences. Yiasemina and Loizos (2005) note different socio-cultural groups develop
numerous mechanisms to aid this construction of meaning. For example, communication
through language is a fundamental tool, with interpretation depending on content, context,
and delivery. Indeed, Vygotsky contended ‘without communication, there can be no thought’
(Carlile & Jordan, 2005).
With this in mind, as social beings, our experiential environments connect individual and
social knowledge, whose contributions have as Yiasemina and Loizos (2005) conclude ‘a
dialectical relationship and cannot be meaningfully separated’.
Linking constructivism to andragogy
A shift in the dominant paradigm within psychology from behaviourism to constructivism
occurred during the 1970s, with educators like Malcolm Knowles translating constructivist
insights into a new teaching method (Seth, 2016). Knowles first introduced the concept that
adults learn differently to children during this period (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2015)
through ‘andragogy’ - ‘the art and science of teaching adults’ (Jordan et al., 2008).
Knowles developed an andragogical model based on assumptions about the characteristic of
adult learners, which include their:
1. Need to know
2. Self-concept
3. Prior experience
4. Readiness to learn
5. Orientation to learning
6. Motivation to learn
(Knowles et al., 2015)
Implications for instruction
We can recognise much in common between Knowles andragogical model and the principles
of constructivism, which in turn can be translated into ‘active, collaborative and authentic
learning’ (Yiasemina & Loizos, 2005) experiences in the context of the adult learner.

4. 3
The central role of the learner actively drawing on experiences to ‘construct’ meaning links to
the notion of an adult’s self-concept of who they are. Moving from a dependant to a self-
directed individual, responsible for their own life decisions (Knowles et al., 2015); building
experience along the way.
When compiling instructional strategies, the autonomy of the learner is central. Rather than
passively absorbing information, a learner should be actively engaged in constructing new
meaning. The role of the instructor is to facilitate this internal ‘meaning-making’ (Jordan et
al., 2008) process, by challenging and encouraging ‘the learner to discover meaning and
understanding’ (Carlile & Jordan, 2005).
Creating instruction around real-world problems allows the learner to draw on and reflect on
prior experiences. As seen in Knowles andragogical model, this is something which adults
are rich in. ‘To adults, experience is who they are’ (Knowles et al., 2015), having lived
longer, they have gained a store of experience, which in turn can be used as a resource for
learning.
‘Constructivists believe that learning is a desire to find the meaning in situations’ (Carlile &
Jordan, 2005). Adult’s orientation to learning is life-centered, and after the learner
establishes their need to know, can draw on internal or external motivations to learn and
address a task possibility rooted in an authentic real-life problem.
Instruction should explain the relevance of the topic, placing an emphasis on the identifying
the context in which the skills can be subsequently applied; even better if immediately useful
(Carlile & Jordan, 2005; Ertmer & Newby, 1993).
It could be argued that a readiness to learn can involve participating in collaborative learning
experiences – engaging with people with diverse experiences can give new interpretations
which can be applied to their own real-life situations. ‘Adults ability to act as resource to
group’ (Knowles, 1980) can be exploited by encouraging teamwork, discussion, study groups
when designing instruction, as well as approaching the material from the learner’s
perspective and accommodating for their diversity (Carlile & Jordan, 2005).

5. 4
IPSARRET
IPSARRET is a flexible eight-stage instructional design model designed by TOS Ltd.
Utilised as a framework for delivering learning material within individual sessions that make
up a course module; it is comprised of eight stages which are: 1. Introduction, 2. Prepare, 3.
Study, 4. Apply, 5. Reflect, 6. Recall, 7. Extend, and 8. Tutorial.
Similar to other instructional models, such as Gagné's 9 Events of Instruction (Gagné, Briggs,
& Wager, 1992), IPSARRET is a step-by-step framework that an instructor can guide the
learner from introducing a topic to opportunities of synthesising information with their own
understanding. To meet course goals and to align with assessment, the model can have
measurable learning outcomes applied in the behaviourist tradition. Core content can be
delivered through multimedia elements, with tasks constructed around the learning outcomes
through activities, such as questions based on recalling prior experience, and problem-based
group discussion focused on real-world situations and applications.
1. Introduction 2. Prepare 3. Study 4. Apply
Learning
Event
What is
happening?
An overview of the topic
and the list of learning
objectives delivered.
Preparatory
material related to
the topic delivered.
Core material
related to the
topic delivered.
Use developed
knowledge in an
activity based on key
learning outcome(s).
5. Reflect 6. Recall 7. Extend 8. Tutorial
Use developed
knowledge in an activity
based on key learning
outcome(s).
Recall key
concepts.
Further reading
around the
learning topic
delivered.
Group discussion
around the core
learning topic.
Table: An outline of the IPSARRET instructional design model.
The treatment of this model in its ‘standard’ delivery form does not align to a true
constructivist approach to instruction as discussed by Yiasemina and Loizos (2005), such as
student/instructor collaboration in selecting learning goals and objectives. However, some
stages contain aspects of constructivist instructional elements such as the Reflect stage.
Alongside the final Tutorial, Reflect can be viewed as most relevant to constructivist theory.

6. 5
Reflect
The activity
The instructional activity requests the learner to read an article which focuses on a central
point related to the session’s topic and then to reflect and contextualise it to their professional
experience.
The purpose
As proposed by Kolb (1984), active reflection is part of a cycle of learning which begins with
concrete experience and progresses to reflection on that experience (Carlile & Jordan, 2005).
The goal of reflection at this stage is not that students can recall facts presented earlier, but an
opportunity for them to interpret, reflect and elaborate on the information given (Ertmer &
Newby, 1993).
The technology tools
Rather than utilizing a private online reflective journal, a group collaboration approach is
taken through a discussion forum. Delivered through Blackboard Learn - the college VLE,
the discussion forum has the value of being an asynchronous medium. This allows for student
reflection and peer engagement by collaboratively sharing experiences and perspectives on
the activity in an extended, structured dialogue over a period of time (Mason & Rennie,
2006).
Role of constructivist theory
Creating a collaborative learning environment is a central strategy of constructivism
(Yiasemina & Loizos, 2005). Learning is impacted by the context of delivery, the content and
the experiences the learner brings. The nature of the discussion should allow prior knowledge
to be developed, compared, and be understood in multiple perspectives around the issue
presented (Yiasemina & Loizos, 2005). Importantly as a learners understanding cannot be
shared, its compatibility can be tested through social negotiation by active participation with
others. (Savery & Duffy, 1996). This is an important basis of shared meaning-making.
Evaluation
By aligning both the andragogical model and constructivist theory, the benefit of the
discussion board activity is that deeper levels of learning can potentially be achieved by
exposing students to the different viewpoints and varying interpretations of their peers, as

7. 6
well as giving time for reflection; leading ‘to higher order thinking of exploring, integrating
and resolving issues’ (Mason & Rennie, 2006).
However, considering Knowles et al. (2015), it is important that the adult learner ‘feel they
control the interaction and have the opportunity to develop their own understanding of the
issues’ (Mason & Rennie, 2006). One technique as suggested by Mason and Rennie (2006),
is to allow students moderate a discussion as a good way of giving adult learners the feeling
of being involved and control of their learning (Mason & Rennie, 2006).
‘Successful discussions require careful guidance and structure by the instructor’ (Mason &
Rennie, 2006). Aligning to Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) (Carlile &
Jordan, 2005), considered feedback to a discussion has value not only due to the ‘speed and
immediacy of the media’ (Mason & Rennie, 2006), but it can prompt ‘meaning-making, and
challenge existing ideas’ (Jordan et al., 2008). Indeed, by gauging individual and group
understanding, the instructor can give clarity around the topic by re-orientating any
misconceptions and address any knowledge gaps.
With this noted, while the role of the instructor is to facilitate learning, it could also be
considered a shared one with the student, for in a true constructivist learning environment
they could be indeed described as active ‘co-learner’ (Lefoe, 1998).
Conclusion
In this paper, I have reviewed constructivism by contextualising the theory through the
characteristics of Knowles’ andragogical model. This allowed me to consider that while
constructivism is applicable to all age groups, it can also be viewed through the single lens of
the adult learner - the primary cohort in my professional context - and thus give awareness of
the implications for instruction.
In turn, I examined andragogical aspects of constructivism through TOS Ltd.’s instructional
design model. While the ‘standard’ delivery format is not constructivist in the truest sense,
constructivist learning theory can be found at some key stages, such as the Reflect stage. The
value of an activity-based discussion forum was examined for its potential in delivering
meaningful constructivist learning experiences through reflection and social negotiation
amongst an experienced adult peer group.

8. 7
References
Carlile,O.,&Jordan,A. (2005). It worksin practice butwill it workin theory?The theoretical
underpinningsof pedagogy.Dublin:All IrelandSocietyforHigherEducation(AISHE).
Clark,R. C.,& Mayer,R. E. (2016). E-learning and the Science of Instruction:Proven Guidelinesfor
Consumersand Designersof Multimedia Learning.New York:JohnWiley&Sons.
Ertmer,P. A.,& Newby,T.J. (1993). Behaviorism,Cognitivism,Constructivism:Comparing Critical
Featuresfroman Instructional DesignPerspective. PerformanceImprovementQuarterly,
6(4), 50-72.
Gagné,R. M., Briggs,L. J.,& Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructionaldesign.ForthWorth,TX:
Harcourt Brace JovanovichCollege.
Jordan,A.,Carlile,O.,&Stack, A.(2008). Approachesto Learning:A Guide forTeachers.Berkshire:
OpenUniversityPress.
Knowles,M.(1980). The Modern Practice of AdultEducation:FromPedagogy to Andragogy (2nd
ed.).Chicago:Follett.
Knowles,M.,Holton,E.,& Swanson,R.(2015). The AdultLearner: The DefinitiveClassic in Adult
Education and Human ResourceDevelopment.London:Routledge.
Kolb,D.A. (1984). ExperientialLearning:Experience asthe Sourceof Learning and Development.
NewJersey:Prentice-Hall.
Lefoe,G.(1998). Creating constructivistlearning environmentson theweb:The challengein higher
education. Paperpresentedatthe Ascilite.
Mason, R.,& Rennie,F.(2006). eLearning:The Key Concepts.London:Routledge.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the Science of Learning:Pearson/Allyn&Bacon.
Miller,P.H. (2010). Piaget'stheory. TheWiley-Blackwell Handbookof Childhood Cognitive
Development,Second edition,649-672.
Savery,J.,& Duffy,T. (1996). ConstructivistLearning Environments:CaseStudiesin Instructional
Design (B.G. WilsonEd.).NewJersey:EducationalTechnologyPublications.
Schunk,D. H. (2012). Learning Theories:An EducationalPerspective:Pearson.
Seth,A.(2016). ApplyingAdultLearningPrinciplestoOnlineCourse Design. DistanceLearning,13(3),
25-32.
Yiasemina,K.,&Loizos,S.(2005). TranslatingConstructivismintoInstructional Design:Potentialand
Limitations. Journalof EducationalTechnology &Society,8(1),17-27.