 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Dr. William P. Bragg III Dissertation ~ June 1999 |
||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||
|
|
 |
|
|
Chapter Two: Literature |
|
|
| [Introduction] [Constructivism] [Technology] [Merge] [Summary] |
|
|
Constructivism
An Overview of Constructivist Learning Constructivism refers to a way of knowing, an epistemology, that has come to be a philosophical conglomerate that incorporates a wide range of intellectual activities, such as learning, reality-building, instructional methods, and inquiry approaches in research and evaluation (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). It has both extended and spawned many theoretical frameworks. It is well beyond the scope of this review to touch upon the whole of constructivism; so, it is the intent of this researcher to focus on constructivist learning, and in the next section specifically examine a particular theoretical model of learning (Jonassen et al., 1995). As theoretical background, the following, is a concise overview of constructivism as it relates to this study. The main tenet, epistemologically, is that knowledge is constructed by the individual in an active process of interaction within particular contexts. In terms of instructional design and teaching, that implies instruction is a process of supporting the individual's construction of knowledge (as opposed to a more conventional method of communicating and transmitting knowledge to the learner). The students negotiate within their minds, reflectively and metacognitively; and with others, socially, within the context of a "community of learners." All of this is situated within the contexts of the instructional environment. Contexts from this perspective could include the people, content, materials and resources, the institution, the degree program, and so on. Relative to the processes of interaction, understanding the concept of context is considered crucial. Many constructivist scholars (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992; Jonassen, 1991; Rogoff, 1990) support the line of logic offered in the previous paragraph. These scholars base much of their thinking on concepts developed by well-recognized educational theorists:
A Model for Learning: Meaning-Making The specific theoretical model used for this study was explicated in the journal article,
Constructivism and Computer-Mediated-Communication in Distance Education
(Jonassen et al., 1995, pp. 7-26). The authors outlined a constructivist model of learning in an attempt to continue a scholarly dialogue with the purpose of matching technology-mediated instructional systems that support
learning at a distance. In particular, the model can be explained as follows. (A diagram of the model is in Appendix A.) The "meaning-making model" (Jonassen et al., 1995) has four basic,
highly interactive components: reflection, articulation, internal negotiation, and social negotiation. These researchers stated that students engage in a highly interrelated, complex process involving these four basic
components. Students reflect on ideas and on their learning, and articulate ideas and thoughts. They negotiate with themselves and with others in an attempt to find meaning and construct knowledge. These
researchers suggested that constructivist environments engage learners in knowledge construction through (a) social-dialogical activities (e.g., collaboration) that embed learning in a meaningful context (Lave &
Wenger, 1991); and, (b) reflection (Ridley, 1991) and metacognition (McCombs, 1991) on what has been learned and on the individual's learning processes. These occur via conversation with other learners ("social
negotiation"), as well as reflectively within one's own mind ("internal negotiation"). Jonassen et al. (1995) advocated the idea that it is the whole learning environment that facilitates
meaning-making
and that this environment consists of four general areas: context, the actual construction of knowledge, interactivity (e.g. collaboration), and conversation. They viewed all of this within a larger constructivist paradigm that "situates learning" as an active process within a context, as opposed to knowledge as an objective entity (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992). To relate this to this investigation, the online dialogue (conversation) is the representation of interactivity (particular to this situation), and the context includes the technology, pedagogy, and community of learners. The online learning is situated within that particular environment. The online interaction, therefore, is the container for all evidence of learning and all its supporting activities.
The following is the framework of the Jonassen et al. (1995) article with references to other overlapping constructs and methods under the constructivist philosophy. For these authors, the main
goal of learning is meaning-making; that is, to derive understanding from the activity of learning. Learning is considered the construction of relevant and useful knowledge, or meaning-making. Jonassen et al. (1995)
stated that this construction of knowledge requires articulation and reflection on what we know. The processes of articulation and reflection require two very interactive processes that overlap: internal negotiation and
social negotiation. Meaning is the understanding that is derived from these processes. Norman (1993) is cited as terming it "reflective knowledge," and that understanding gained through applying it can be termed
"experiential knowledge." This whole process is an active process, where the learner is engaged in meaning-making. Knowledge emerges from our interactions with the world, and as Rorty (1991) pointed
out, these interactions occur socially, within a community, through a dialogical process. The knowledge construction is personally relevant, yet there is shared meaning in that knowledge is considered relevant to given
contexts and within certain communities (Rorty, 1991). The active engagement requires learning strategies that include inquiry that is situated in communities of practice
(Lave & Wenger, 1991). Situated learning theory, and concepts such as apprenticeship, mentoring, and scaffolding (Vygotsky, 1978) have a very significant constructivist base. These concepts support the notion that the learning process is a holistic activity. This view is reflected in constructivist notions, such as "authentic learning" and "situated cognition" (Brown et al., 1989) and "cognitive apprenticeship" (Collins et al., 1989). These represent complex, negotiated learning relationships that might be better examined in context.
The exchange of ideas and activities like debate and critical deliberation are embedded in "social-dialogical activities" (Jonassen, 1991) that are meaningful and personally relevant (Jonassen et al., 1995),
and need to be allowed to emerge. As Lave & Wenger (1991) stated: "Learning itself is an improvised practice: A learning curriculum unfolds in opportunities for engagement in practice" (p. 93). The
knowledge-building aspect is a very dialogical process, as Wertsch (1991) argues: learning is a very socially based, dialogic process. Jonassen et al. (1995) built on this by stating that "learning is participating in
and interacting with the surrounding environment" (p. 11). The idea of the learning process being dialogically based is built upon ideas from theorists like Vygotsky (1978), who claimed that language is
the great mediator of learning. Jonassen et al. (1995) stated that "learning is conversation" (p. 9). The meaning-making process is mediated by language in social exchanges, thus making this process very
interactive, and dynamic, and therefore complex to examine. Two very important components of the meaning-making model are reflective thinking and metacognitive thinking. To negotiate internally and socially, one
must be engaged in the metacognitive process of being aware of one's own learning processes and strategies, and being able to self-evaluate and self-regulate (McCombs, 1991); and be able to reflect on one's own
thinking, others' ideas, and communicative interaction. Educational psychologists, such as Ridley (1991) and Mills (1991), support the reflective process referred to in the model. They suggested that through
interaction with others in social situations involving dialogue and the higher order thinking process of reflection, students construct self-image, self-esteem, and systems of self-regulation. They also suggested that
reflection is very integrated with metacognitive processes, such as self-regulation and self-awareness, in that reflection helps students to be aware of their own learning experiences and begin to self-regulate
their own learning. Reflective processes require that the learner be engaged in internal negotiation and social negotiation as outlined in the model (Jonassen et al., 1995), to make sense of the world, to build
understanding. Through the act of reflection, they build perceptions of themselves, their experiences and relationships, and a greater self-understanding and awareness (Mills, 1991). Metacognition has been
defined as the awareness and regulation of one's own thinking processes, and is considered to be critical for effective learning (McCombs, 1991). Other educational researchers espouse that the teaching-learning process
includes a need for metacognition, the self-awareness and self-regulation of thinking processes associated with learning and knowing (Flavell, 1976). The concept of metacognition aligns well with this constructivist
model, as evidenced by a description of a metacognition construct, "self-regulated learning" (Ridley et al., 1992): the extent to which a learner is an active agent in his/her own learning process. Ridley et al, (1992)
stated that a student who effectively self-regulates is one who develops a metacognitive awareness about his own interactivity within educational experiences. This logic elucidates the importance of metacognitive
processes in the individual's process of knowledge construction. Jonassen et al. (1995) further stated that the purpose of a learning environment is to engage learners and require them to construct the knowledge
that is most meaningful to them. The model, which outlined a theoretical framework for learning, posited in constructivist terms a definition for learning: the active construction of personally relevant meaning
(meaning-making). Thus, this particular model of learning is also a way of understanding the instructional environment. It reflects the importance of understanding how the components of the instructional environment
operate, and the ways in which they interact with each other and with the learners. This model framed against the literature on technology-mediated instructional environments leads to some very important
questions that are presently emerging in the fields of constructivist education and instructional technology:
(1) Does a particular online environment support and facilitate learning? (2) Furthermore, what kinds of learning, content, and instructional strategies best fit with a particular
online environment? (3) How does a particular environment support and facilitate learning? (4) In particular, how does the interactive processes of an online environment reflect the
constructs of a constructivist learning model? (5) How do components of this model, such as reflection and metacognition, social negotiation and internal negotiation, facilitate meaning-making in
online learning communities? Also, how do students collaborate and engage in other interactive learning relationships (such as mentoring, peer tutoring, sharing stories)?
These are examples of the salient issues that arise from the literature on applying constructivist learning principles to advanced instructional technology – in particular, imposing the model of Jonassen
et al. (1995) onto a Web-based learning community.
Adult Learning: Integrating Constructivism and Technology The literature review for this study includes research in the areas of educational technology and constructivism. As stated elsewhere, the literature on the particular educational technology involved in this study elucidates how well constructivist principles integrate with the educational intentions of that technology (as espoused by instructional technologists). In both cases, the literature that has been presented deals with higher education – that is, adult learning. Even so, a section is necessary to outline what is considered to be effective adult education principles in ways that integrate these principles with constructivist learning theory and the particular technology involved. As for the constructivist literature, much of the principles of modern adult learning integrate well with constructivist theory. Adult learning principles are reflected in much of the technology literature, as the studies were conducted at the university level and/or in adult training situations. The following is a summary of these principles, which help to build the foundation for analyzing the particular adult learning scenario of this study. Brookfield (1986) posited that effective adult pedagogy include the following principles: (1) the instructor must be a facilitator, a learning guide; (2) adult learning is a continual active process of collaboration, reflection, self-analysis, and co-empowerment; and, (3) the elements composing peer interaction (feedback, critical reflection, collegiality, self-assessment, peer assessment) are very important . The learners as active participants in their own learning is supported by many other researchers in adult learning. Knowles (1980) suggested that to create effective learning environments for adults, it is necessary to involve learners in planning the learning experiences, creating their own objectives and goals, and in evaluating themselves and their peers. Elias & Merriam (1980) posited that effective adult learning comes through discovery, experience, collaboration and interaction with peers; and that this is best accomplished through facilitation by the instructor as opposed to direct teaching. The emphasis in adult learning seems to be placed on the learner. Knox (1986) found that adult learners must assume responsibility for their own learning with a focus on working toward personal goals. He also found that an effective instructional environment must be supportive, challenging, friendly, open, informal, and spontaneous. Further, an emphasis is based on the perspective that adults are self-regulating. Adults tend to be self-motivated and self-directed toward personal and professional growth (Elias & Merriam, 1980). Therefore, adult educators must employ instructional strategies that facilitate the development of the metacognitive skills of self-regulation and self-management of learning (Brookfield, 1986). Elias & Merriam (1980) found that effective learning happens when adults assume responsibility for learning. In summary, typical research on adult learners emphasizes the need for instructional environments that encourage self-directed learning and high levels of interactivity. It is also stressed that the role of the educator is to facilitate. These basic overarching principles integrate well with both major components of this study: the constructivist learning model and the particular technology-mediated, distance learning environment of Web-based computer conferencing.
|
|
|
| [Diss. - Bragg] [Introduction] [Literature] [Methodology] [Results] [Conclusion] [Other Pages] |