You are here:

Bridging Theory and Practice: Developing Guidelines to Facilitate the Design of Computer-based Learning Environments
ARTICLE

CJLT Volume 29, Number 3, ISSN 1499-6677 e-ISSN 1499-6677 Publisher: Canadian Network for Innovation in Education

Abstract

Abstract. The design of computer-based learning environments has undergone a paradigm shift; moving students away from instruction that was considered to promote technical rationality grounded in objectivism, to the application of computers to create cognitive tools utilized in constructivist environments. The goal of the resulting computer-based learning environment design principles is to have students learn with technology, rather than from technology. This paper reviews the general constructivist theory that has guided the development of these environments, and offers suggestions for the adaptation of modest, generic guidelines, not mandated principles, that can be flexibly applied and allow for the expression of true constructivist ideals in online learning environments.

Citation

Young, L. & Young, L. (2003). Bridging Theory and Practice: Developing Guidelines to Facilitate the Design of Computer-based Learning Environments. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 29(3),. Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. Retrieved December 18, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Anderson, M. (1999). Virtual universities _ future implications for students and academics. Paper presented at the 16th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/papers.htm
  2. Atkins, M.J. (1993). Theories of learning and multimedia applications: An overview. Research Papers in Education, 8(2), 251-271.
  3. Atkins, M. & Blissett, G. (1992). Interactive video and cognitive problem-solving skills. Educational Technology, 32(1), 44-50.
  4. Brandon, D. & Hollingshead, A. (1999). Collaborative learning and computer-supported groups. Communication Education, 48(2), 109-126.
  5. Brickhouse, N.W. (1994). Children's observations, ideas and the development of classroom theories about light. Journal of Research of Science Teaching, 31(6), 639-656.
  6. Brooks, M.G. & Brooks, J.G. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 38-43.
  7. Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organizational Science, 2(1), 40-57.
  8. Carey, S. (1986). Cognitive science and science education. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1123-1130.
  9. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1996). Looking at technology in context: A framework for understanding technology and educational research. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 807-840). New York: Simon& Schuster Macmillan.
  10. Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M. & Knuth, R. (1993). Textbook of the future. In C. McKnight (Ed.), Hypertext: A psychological perspective. London: Ellis Horwood Pubs.
  11. Dalgarno, B. (1996). Constructivist computer assisted learning: Theories and techniques. Paper presented at the 13th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Adelaide, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide96/papers/21.html
  12. De Jong, T. & Van Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179-201.
  13. Doolittle, P. (1997). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development as a theoretical foundation for cooperative learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 8(1), 83-103.
  14. Duchastel, P. & Spahn, S. (1996). Design for web-based learning. Presented at WebNet '96, San Francisco, USA. Retrieved December 7, 2002 from http://www.nova.edu/~spahn/web_based_learning.htm.
  15. Duffy, T.M. & Cunningham, D.J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications Technology. (pp.
  16. Duffy, T.M. & Jonassen, D.H. (1994). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction, In D.H. Jonassen, (Ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, NY: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
  17. Feenberg, A. (1999). Whither educational technology? Peer Review, 1(4), 3-5.
  18. Gruba, P. & Lynch, B. (1997). Constructivist approaches to communication skills instruction. Paper presented at the 14 th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Perth, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth97/papers/Gruba/Gruba.html
  19. Hannafin, M.J., Hall, C., Land, S. & Hill, J. (1994). Learning in open-ended environments: Assumptions, methods, and implications. Educational Technology, 34(8), 48-55.
  20. Harnad, S. (1982) Neoconstructivism: A unifying theme for the cognitive sciences. In: T. Simon& R. Scholes (Eds.), Language, mind and brain, (pp. 1-11). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
  21. Hill, J.R., & Hannafin, M.J. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning from the WorldWide Web. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(4), 37-64.
  22. Ip, A. & Morrison, I. (2001). Learning objects in different pedagogical paradigms. Paper presented at the 18th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne01/pdf/papers/ipa.pdf
  23. Jared, E. & Jared, A. (1997). Launching into improved comprehension: Integrating the KWL Model into middle level courses. Technology Teacher, 56(6), 24-31.
  24. Jona, K. (2000). Rethinking the design of online courses. Paper presented at the 17th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Coffs Harbour, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/kemi_jona_keynote.pdf
  25. Jonassen, D.H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.
  26. Jonassen, D.H. (1994). Thinking technology: Towards a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 3 (4), 34-37.
  27. Jonassen, D.H. (1995). Technology as cognitive tools: Learners as designers. ITForum Paper 1. Retrieved December 7, 2002 from http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper1/paper1.html.
  28. Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C. & Yueh, H.P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32.
  29. Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, C., Campbell, J. & Haag, B.B. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2),
  30. Land, S.M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology, 48(3), 61-75.
  31. Land, S.M. & Hannafin, M.J. (1997). Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: A qualitative study. Educational Technology Research& Development, 45(2), 47-73.
  32. Lefoe, G. (1998). Creating constructivist learning environments on the web: The challenge in higher education. Paper presented at the 15th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Wollongong, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/asc98-pdf/lefoe00162.pdf
  33. London, C. (1988). A Piagetian constructivist perspective on curriculum development. Reading Improvement, 27, 82-95.
  34. Moallem, M. (2001). Applying constructivist and objectivist learning theories in the design of a web-based course: Implications for practice. Educational Technology& Society, 4(3), 113-125.
  35. Nicaise, M. & Crane, M. (1999). Knowledge constructing through hypermedia authoring. Educational Technology Research& Development, 47(1), 29-50.
  36. Oliver, K. (1999, February). Computer-based tools in support of internet-based problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, St. Louis, MO.
  37. O'Reilly, M. & Newton, D. (2001). Interaction online: Above and beyond requirements of assessment. Paper presented at the 18th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne01/pdf/papers/oreillym.pdf
  38. Papert, S. & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In S. Papert& I. Harel (Eds.), Constructionism. (pp. 1-7). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  39. Pea, R.D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167-182.
  40. Perkins, D. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information-processing technology shapes thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11-17.
  41. Perkins, D. (1999). The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 28-35.
  42. Roblyer, M.D. (1996, October). The constructivist/objectivist debate: Implications for instructional technology research. Learning and Leading with Technology, 24, 12-16.
  43. Savery, J.R. & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
  44. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.
  45. Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1999). Schools as knowledge-building organizations. In D. Keating& C. Hertzman (Eds.), Today's children tomorrow's society: The developmental health and wealth of nations (pp.
  46. Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2002). Knowledge building. In Encyclopedia of Education (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan Reference, USA.
  47. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C. And Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201-228). MA: MIT Press.
  48. Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  49. Strommen, E.F. & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology, and the future of classroom learning. Education and Urban Society, 24 (4), 466-476.
  50. Takala, M., Hawk, D. & Rammos, Y. (2001). On the opening of society: Towards a more open and flexible educational system. Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 18, 291-306.
  51. Willis, J. (1995). A recursive, reflective instructional design model based on constructivist-interpretivist theory. Educational Technology, 30(6), 5-23.
  52. Willis, J. & Wright, K.E. (2000). A general set of procedures for constructivist instructional design: The new R2D2 model. Educational Technology, 40(2), 5-20.
  53. Wilson, B.G. (1997). Reflections on constructivism and instructional design. In C.R. Dills & A.A. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms. (Chapter 7). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
  54. Wilson, B.G. & Cole, P. (1991). A review of elaboration theory. Educational Technology Research& Development, 39 (4), 47-63.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. The Trade Fair: Introducing ESP Multimedia at a Technical University in Taiwan

    Shu-Chiao Tsai; B. Davis, University of North Carolina-Charlotte

    International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) Vol. 3, No. 3 (Sep 21, 2008) pp. 45–55

  2. Elements of Effective e-Learning Design

    Andrew Brown & Bradley Voltz

    The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 6, No. 1 (Mar 01, 2005)

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.