The Relationship between Technology and Constructivist ...€¦ · Web viewThe impact that technological advances have on our society creates a need for learning theories and methods

Running Head:THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING THEORIES1

The Relationship between Technology and Constructivist Learning Theories

Debra Killen

Boise State University

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING THEORIES 1

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to research the different constructivist instructional methods and the

technology being used in classrooms, as well as their interrelationship. Nine peer-reviewed

articles were examined relating to constructivism, the influence constructivism has on education,

the methods being employed to use technology, and the results of this use for both teachers and

students. The articles by Kang, Choi, & Chang (2007), Keengwe, Onchwari, & Agamba (2014),

and Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn (2007) each provided helpful information in understanding

both the definition of constructivism as well as historical developments surrounding the theory.

The articles by Keengwe, Onchwari, & Agamba (2014), and Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn

(2007) also provided information on the components necessary for the constructivist educational

environment. The article by Alismail and McGuire (2015) provided information on two styles on

implementation for practical application of constructivist learning methods in the classroom.

Many of the articles provided information concerning the necessary changes needed to better

prepare teachers and students to use constructivist learning methods. Finally, Draper, Smith and

Sabey (2004), Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn (2007), and (Lee et al., 2014) provided results

from studies that supported the benefits of constructivist learning methods. After completing a

review of these articles, we are able to examine the relationship between technology and

constructivist learning theories.


The Relationship between Technology and Constructivist Learning Theories

Instructional methods which fall under the umbrella of Constructivism have many

different names including: project-based learning, problem-based learning, anchored instruction,

and cognitive apprenticeship. These learning theories are receiving much attention in education

today as the job skills that education seeks to cultivate move from industrial skills to information

age skills in order to produce employable graduates,. In an article by Kang, Choi, & Chang

(2007), the effect brought about by technological advances is addressed as follows, “Technology

in the 2000s has reorganized how we live, how we communicate, and how we learn” (p. 403).

The impact that technological advances have on our society creates a need for learning theories

and methods that reflect this change (Kang et al., 2007). As an educational technologist, I believe

it is important to understand the most current learning theories and the most effective methods of

applying technology while using the theories. The purpose of this paper is to research the

different constructivist instructional methods and the technology being used in classrooms, as

well as their interrelationship. First, I will discuss the characteristics of constructivist learning

theories. Second, I will discuss the use of technology paired with constructivist instructional

methods. Finally, lessons learned about implementing constructivist learning methods for both

teachers and students will be discussed.

Constructivism: Description and History

Constructivism is described by Keengwe, Onchwari, & Agamba (2014) as “an

educational theory that emphasizes hands-on, activity-based teaching and learning in which

students develop their own frames of thought” (p. 888). The constructivist approach to learning

encourages active learning with students having the opportunity to interact with learning

materials rather than simply listening to a lecture. Teachers are encouraged to use learning


activities that are problem-oriented. Authentic tasks designed to increase engagement by

providing relevance are an important part of constructivist instructional methods. Reflective

learning is also encouraged by allowing time to think and discuss the material being studied.

Students are given the opportunity to find their own path through a wide variety of learning

resources, exploring the material as teachers take the role of guide and mentor. Creativity,

collaboration, and cooperation are encouraged as students work in groups to complete authentic

assessments that provide value to the learning material. Through all of these activities, the

student is an active learner, gaining deeper understanding and effective problem solving and

critical thinking skills. (Keengwe et al., 2014). Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn (2007) support

these findings by stating, “In conclusion, constructivist learning is an educational approach that

effectively motivates learners by enabling a more active, explorative and interactive learning

process” (pg. 22).

The research of Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Jonassen has provided the foundation on

which current constructivist instructional methods are based. The idea that knowledge is

developed through situations that the learner experiences comes from the research of Dewey.

Piaget’s research advocates active learning. Vygotsky provided the idea of learning activities

being part of instructional methods. Jonassen encouraged situated problem solving tasks and the

design of the learning environment (Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn, 2007). In 1991, as Jonassen

was researching constructivism, the publication of a special issue of Educational Technology

brought about serious discussions concerning constructivism, with scholars forming anti-

constructivist and pro-constructivist camps. After this special edition was published, the focus of

research being done into constructivism began to change more towards a discussion of

application of constructivist methods rather than the theory of constructivism. With the


development of technology during the same time frame, the application of constructivism began

to include technology tools. At this time as well, major journals on education and technology

began to feature articles discussing the various constructivist instructional methods such as

problem-based learning, project-based learning, and inquiry-based learning (Kang, Choi, &

Chang, 2007).

Constructivism and Technology

E-learning is a word used to describe an approach to learning which facilitates learning

through the use of computer technology (Keengwe et al., 2014). Seymour Papert, an MIT

mathematician, computer scientist, and educator, along with other technology enthusiasts,

predicted that the introduction of computers to education would transform learning (Halverson

and Smith, 2010). According to the article by Wangpipatwong and Papasratorn (2007),

“Contructivist learning is considered to the ideal pedagogy for e-learning (p. 23). Kang et al.

(2007) feel strongly about the importance of constructivist learning. Their research leads them to

conclude that the social needs of learners in the 21st century require the implementation of a

constructivist learning environment. When using technology in an e-learning environment, the

teacher’s role shifts to that of a guide, leading students through the learning experience. The

teacher is able to provide students with a varied learning path where students can become active

learners as they choose where and what to study. Students are encouraged to explore

information, make connections, and build knowledge. Problem-solving is a common component

of e-learning activities, often in groups so that collaboration among students and teachers takes

place. Wangpipatwong and Papasratorn (2007) in their article, propose three key components to

be included in the design of e-learning environments: exploration, collaboration, and reflection.

Exploration can be accomplished by giving students the opportunity to search information


resources. Teachers can guide this activity by providing hyperlinks to a selection of resources.

This may especially be helpful to younger students as they learn the characteristics of good

search strategies and gain skills to identify credible information. Much of what is learned during

the exploration phase is new knowledge. Collaboration is the second component considered to be

key. Collaboration allows students to actively construct new knowledge as they interact with

peers, teachers, or even experts in a given field. Reflection is the third key component. Through

reflection, students are given the opportunity to discuss and explain. This process helps students

make connections between theories, observations, and experiences (Wangpipatwong &

Papasratorn, 2007). Teachers should keep in mind the importance of aligning the assessments

associated with any type of constructivist learning activity to the desired learning outcomes.

Authentic learning activities should encourage students to be creative and stimulate critical

thinking without being confusing or overwhelming to students (Keengwe et al., 2014).

Problem-based learning is one example of a learning method that can incorporate skills

and content knowledge while engaging students in analyzing topics related to the real world. In

the article by Alismail and McGuire (2015), they note that research shows student participation

increases and critical thinking skills are enhanced when students participate in problem-based

learning. The authors state, “Some researchers found a significant correlation between problem-

based learning activities and the critical thinking skills that students need in the 21st century” (p.

152). Another learning method is cooperative learning. This method is characterized by dividing

students into groups. Diverse abilities, skills, and interests of the student group increases

creativity and innovation. These groups can foster respect for others, ability to compromise, and

ability to delegate responsibilities. In each of these learning methods, it is important that the

teacher link knowledge to the real world. Alismail and McGuire (2015) stress the importance of


authentic learning. Real world linking creates information that students find more interesting and

engaging. It provides the opportunity for students to reach outside the school walls and

communicate with experts and specialists in different fields of study. Students have the ability to

research and obtain new knowledge outside of what is found in dated textbooks (Alismail and

McGuire, 2015).

Communication and computer technology provide tools that support many different

skills. Alismail and McGuire (2015) state, “Technology is a powerful tool, which allows students

to access information and knowledge by themselves” (p. 153). Through the use of websites,

ePortfolios, blogs, wikis, WebQuests, and many other technology resources, students have the

ability to work in collaborative groups which has been shown to increase student motivation and

develop critical thinking skills. Alismail and McQuire point out research has found that the use

of multimedia tools promotes higher-level thinking skills. Another aspect of technology that

proves valuable is the ability for students to provide peer feedback. Peer review helps develop

critical thinking skills and provides meaningful feedback to improve work. Technology tools

allow students to become more informed and stay current with social issues. Students develop

reading, writing, and online literacy skills. Multimedia tools also provide the means to increase

creativity and innovation. All of these skills prepare students to learn how to learn, which is an

important skill in our quickly changing world. Alismail and McQuire (2015) sum up the value of

technology in the following statement, “Multimedia tools are the best way to increase student

performance and motivation to learn by encouraging discussion, collaboration, problem solving

and innovation, promoting cognitive processes and constructing knowledge” (p. 153).

Teacher Impact


In several of the articles referenced in this paper we find a similar theme, teachers

struggle to move away from instructionist learning methods in favor of constructivist learning

methods. In the article by Halverson and Smith the resilience of the instructionist model is

described as follows, “Researchers such as Larry Cuban found that instruction in many schools

looks shockingly similar to instruction 20, 50, even 100 years ago” (2010, p. 49). Today’s

teachers were educated both as children and also through their pre-service training in college

using instructionist learning strategies, yet we expect them to move to constructivist teaching

strategies in our modern classrooms. Educational reform from the instructionist movement to the

constructivist movement is difficult. In a study by Judson (2006), it was found that there is a

relationship between the use of technology and a teacher’s view of constructivist learning. The

study also found that often a teacher’s use of technology in the classroom can be dependent on

their degree of expertise. Ertmer (2005) tells us, “Given this, personal theories and beliefs are

rarely sufficiently revised and, thus over time, become deeply personal, highly engrained, and

extremely resistant to change” (p. 4). Researchers have come to the conclusion that professional

development is needed that would specifically address the goal of integrating technology in a

constructivist manner. This professional development should “focus on the rationale of

constructivism, not on forcing the use of technology” (Judson, 2006, pg. 592). There are several

ideas that can be used as part of professional development to provide teachers with the beliefs

and skills needed to implement constructivist learning methods. First, find a task that holds value

for the teacher and introduce a technology tool to accomplish the task. This will create value for

the tool and the tools use can be expanded to accomplish new and different tasks. Second, begin

with simple uses of technology. If teachers can be provided with a positive experience and

repeated practice, then they may be more likely to adopt these practices in their classroom.


Finally, participation in professional learning communities will benefit teachers who are learning

to use constructivist instructional methods and technology. Professional learning communities

allow teachers to discuss new methods and strategies that are working in their classroom. These

discussions provide challenge and support to fellow teachers as they implement similar methods

and strategies (Ertmer, 2005). Pre-service teachers should have constructivist learning methods

modeled for them so that they can learn the skills necessary to teach in a constructivist manner.

Lew’s study found that often teachers lose their “idealism” during the first 1 to 3 years of

teaching. These young teachers find themselves alone and unsupported by seasoned teachers

who could mentor them. Often, teachers who began working to implement constructivist learning

methods revert back to more instructionist practices at this point in their career. Training pre-

service teachers in constructivist teaching strategies followed by support from a more established

mentor teacher will greatly improve the odds that these teachers will continue to use

constructivist strategies in their classroom. (Lew, 2010)

Ultimately, the change must begin with teachers and their willingness to learn about new

methods and their ability to alter their existing belief systems concerning teaching and learning

(Draper, Smith, & Sabey, 2004). Change takes time. We learn from Ertmer (2005) that, “it takes

five or six years for teachers to accumulate enough expertise to use technology in ways

advocated by constructivist reform efforts” (p. 27). Technology use can facilitate many aspects

of constructivist learning including: collaboration, constructing knowledge, creativity in

interpreting information, and learning from experts from all over the world, but it is important to

remember that the goal of constructivism in not the use of technology. Professional development

should not be focused on simply training teachers to use particular aspects of technology

(Judson, 2006). Keengwe et al. (2014), remind us that the usefulness of technology in the


classroom is determined by the way in which teachers use technology tools. The use of

technology should in no way undermine sound pedagogical practices. Teachers should be careful

to create a balance between constructivism, technology, and pedagogy.

Student Impact

The results of studies on student achievement following instruction using constructivist

learning methods are summarized in several of the articles that were reviewed. In each case,

students benefited from learning material presented using constructivist learning methods. In a

study by Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn (2007), study results showed that “students who learned

in constructivist e-learning environments had a better knowledge development than students who

learning in traditional learning environments” (p. 30). A study by Draper, Smith and Sabey

(2004) concludes that technology instruction is necessary to provide students with skills that

allow them to be prepared to address and solve problems in their communities. Lew (2010) cited

research that concluded students who are taught using constructivist instructional methods

exhibited improved success in science due to their abilities to think critically and apply acquired

knowledge in new situations. In regards to student expectations, Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn

(2007) found that students in the study expected teachers to provide the knowledge they needed.

The students were not familiar with the constructivist methods of learning. It was found that

students were hesitant to move forward with their own learning, waiting for the teacher to take

the lead or provide feedback. This requires the teachers to understand their role as facilitator, but

also to realize that they must encourage students as they learn to work in the constructivist

environment. The study did find that students were happier in the constructivist environment

after an initial period of learning new methods (Wangpipatwong & Papasratorn, 2007). Lee et al.

(2014) conducted a study of 500 secondary school students to explore student perceptions of


self-directed learning. One important discovery made during this study involves the need to teach

students the technology skills necessary to learn using constructivist learning methods paired

with technology tools. The technology skills that students possess through their social and

recreational use of technology, do not translate directly to the skills needed to explore and learn

using technology in the educational setting (Lee et al., 2014).

Conclusion

After completing a review of many different articles describing characteristics of

constructivist learning theories, the use of technology to facilitate constructivist learning

strategies, and how teachers and students can be better prepared to use constructivist methods,

we are able to examine the relationship between technology and constructivist learning theories.

Kang et al. (2007) came to the conclusion that “...social needs in the 21st century quite obviously

require the development of constructivist learning environments” (pg. 407) Drawing conclusions

from the research, we can see that technology is not a required component of constructivism, but

technology can add value to the constructivist classroom by motivating students to be more

active and explorative in their learning, leading to deeper understanding (Judson, 2006).

Technology can provide the ability to complete tasks in ways that are not possible otherwise.

Keengwe et al. (2014) conclude their article with a powerful statement, “The essence of

evidence-based learning lies in the alignment of technological tools with established goals and

desirable learning outcomes to promote authentic learning that is transferable to new situations”

(p. 897). The research found in the articles reviewed, leads me to believe in the importance of

pairing constructivist learning methods and technology. For teachers, this pairing enables them to

use technology to harness its power to engage students in the world around them and provide


education with value. For students, this pairing leads to the skills necessary to reach their full

potential in the community through authentic learning.


Works Cited

Alismail, H. A., & McGuire, P. (2015). 21st Century Standards and Curriculum: Current

Research and Practice. Journal of Education and Practice. 6, 6, 150-154.

Draper, R., Smith, L., & Sabey, B. (January 01, 2004). Supporting change in teacher education:

Using technology as a tool to enhance problem-based learning. Computers in the

Schools, 21, 25-42. doi:10.1300/J025v21n01_03

Ertmer, P. A. (December 01, 2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest

for technology integration?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 4,

25-39.

Halverson, R., & Smith, A. (2010). How new technologies have (and have not) changed teaching

and learning in schools. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 26(2), 49-54.

Judson, E. (2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a

connection?. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 581-597.

Kang, I., Choi, J.-I., & Chang, K. (2007). Constructivist research in educational technology: A

retrospective view and future prospects. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(3), 397-412.

Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Agamba, J. (2014). Promoting effective E-learning practices

through the constructivist pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 19(4),

887-898. doi:10.1007/s10639-013-9260-1

Lee, K., Tsai, P.-S., Chai, C. S., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Students' perceptions of self-directed

learning and collaborative learning with and without technology. Journal of Computer

Assisted Learning, 30(5), 425-437. doi:10.1111/jcal.12055


Wangpipatwong, T., & Papasratorn, B. (2007). The influence of constructivist E-learning system

on student learning outcomes. International Journal of Information and Communication

Technology Education, 3(4), 21-33.

Documents

The Relationship between Technology and Constructivist ...€¦ · Web viewThe impact that technological advances have on our society creates a need for learning theories and methods