Recent research studies (Montoya et al., 2011; Wolf et al., 2009; Gierlowski et al., 2009; Kanev et al., 2009; Beetham, 2005) demonstrate that traditional educational instructor –centered approaches need to be replaced with more active instruction. Instead of viewing knowledge as an arbitrary set of facts, knowledge needs to be constructed by the learner so it can be used as a tool for future learning activities. There is an urgent need for shifting the focus of training and education from passive reception of facts to student knowledge transformation where in an individual constructs new knowledge through interactions and negotiations.
It is essential to underscore the fact that constructivist principles include building on student prior knowledge, making learning relevant and meaningful, giving student’s choice and autonomy, and having instructors act as co-learners. In this sense, instructors might design tasks wherein learners solve real world problems, reflect on skills used to manage one’s own learning, address misconceptions in their thinking, categorize problems around themes and concepts, and generally take ownership for their own learning.
A significant consideration in this regard is to note that there are two important variations of constructivism – cognitive constructivist and social constructivist. Cognitive constructivists tend to focus on the individual construction of knowledge discovered or built in interaction with the surrounding environment. From this point of view, it is important for educators to foster active learning environments in which learners can individually build knowledge. Essentially, the cognitive constructivist view regards knowledge as internally embodied in the mind of the learner. Unfortunately, individual notions of constructivism often fail to emphasize the dynamic social aspects of learning and cognition- the dialogue, collaboration, negotiation, and questioning of active learning environments.
Conversely, social constructivists view learning as connection with and appropriation from a larger social context. It follows that instructional methods from this latter view focus on dialogue, instructor co-learning, and the joint construction of knowledge. However, these essential features are lacking in the current e-learning paradigm.
As noted earlier, cognitive constructivists focus on making learning more relevant, building on student prior knowledge, and addressing misconceptions. Social constructivists, on the other hand, emphasize human dialogue, interaction, negotiation, and collaboration. It is important to note here that, across both perspectives, constructivist practices emphasize active, generative learning in which instructors continue to perform their critical learning function as learning guides. Note that the focus here is on “assisting learning”, - not on“directing and assessing it”.
The impact of using guided or assisted learning – instead of either mechanistic or discovery learning systems- fosters positive effects on learning. In an e-learning environment, such assistance might include questioning, task structuring, coaching, modeling, pushing students to articulate ideas and explore new avenues, and the occasional timely direct instruction. From a social constructivist viewpoint, new learning communities as a consequence can emerge. In summary, in an e-learning environment, the transformation from the current model of “instructor-centric” to “learner-centric” paradigm would have vast positive implications for students, instructors, and educational technology designers.
- 1085 reads
