How Constructivist Is That? Three Mental Models Shaping Learning Designs in Enterprise Systems
PROCEEDINGS
David W. Price, Saul Carliner, Concordia University, Canada
EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-16-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC
Abstract
Course management systems (CMS) are commonly used to deliver e-learning in higher education. Valued for improving efficiency, typical CMS use focuses on using a few features to support one-way transmission of information from instructors to students. This study examines data from three case studies of teaching professional writing using CMSs in universities. Based on an analysis of each course, three mental models were inferred for the instructors who designed them: the library, the classroom, and the action centre. The library was a quiet place for self study. The classroom encouraged processing of content through structured discussion, and detailed assignment guidelines and feedback. The action centre focused on online collaboration and service learning. Although three instructors used similar course management systems, their mental models resulted in three very different courses. Course designers must develop awareness of how their mental models shape the way they use CMSs.
Citation
Price, D.W. & Carliner, S. (2015). How Constructivist Is That? Three Mental Models Shaping Learning Designs in Enterprise Systems. In S. Carliner, C. Fulford & N. Ostashewski (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2015--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 461-466). Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 5, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/151313/.
© 2015 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Anderson, T. & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3). Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/890/1663. Carliner, S. (2005). Course management systems versus learning management systems. Learning Circuits, 1-7.
- Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445459.
- Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. Doi:10.1007/BF02299088.
- Conan Doyle, A. (1894). Silver Blaze. Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/834/834-h/834-H.htm
- Dutta, A., Roy, R., & Seetharaman, P. (2013). Course management system adoption and usage: A process theoretic perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2535-2545.
- Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
- Jones, N., Ross, H., Lynam, T., Perez, P., & Leitch, A. (2011). Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society, 16 (1), 46-46.
- Kozma, R. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), pp. 7-19.
- Krumm, A.E. (2012). An examination of the diffusion and implementation of learning management systems in higher education (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan).
- Lai, A., & Savage, P. (2013). Learning Management Systems and Principles of Good Teaching: Instructor and Student Perspectives. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 39(3), 1-21.
- Lane, L.M. (2009). Insidious pedagogy: How course management systems affect teaching. First Monday, 14(10).
- Lonn, S., & Teasley, S.D. (2009). Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems. Computers& Education, 53(3), 686-694.
- Malikowski, S.R. (2008). Factors related to breadth of use in course management systems. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 81-86.
- Morgan, G. (2003). Faculty use of course management systems (Vol. 2). ECAR, EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
- Porter, G. (2011). Specifics of course management system benefits for new university faculty. Higher Education Studies, 1(2), 2-7.
- Prescott, D.L., Gunn, C., Alieldin, W., Botter, K., Baghestani, S., & Saadat, H. (2013). Faculty use of the course management system (CMS) iLearn at the American University of Sharjah. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(1), 1-12.
- Schoonenboom, J. (2014). Using an adapted, task-level technology acceptance model to explain why instructors in higher education intend to use some learning management system tools more than others. Computers& Education, 71, 247-256.
- Stroupe, C. (2003). Making distance presence: The compositional voice in online learning. Computers and Composition, 20, 255–275.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References