yukyongportfolio.weebly.comyukyongportfolio.weebly.com/.../chung_finaldraft.docx · Web viewConstructionism is a theory of learning that emphasizes learners’ active engagement

Running head: CONSTRUCTIONISM AND ITS APPLICATION IN A DIGITAL WORLD 1

Constructionism and Its Application in a Digital World

Yukyong Chung

Virginia Tech

CONSTRUCTIONISM AND ITS APPLICATION IN A DIGITAL WORLD 2

Abstract

Much research in the field of Learning Science (LS) has been conducted to further understand

principles of learning, to improve learning environments, and to develop innovative methods of

learning and teaching. These efforts have brought about prominent theories of learning and

methodologies of teaching. One of the prevalent ideas of these learning theories is that learners

constructing their own knowledge engage as active participants, such as discovery, observation,

making meaningful artifacts, interaction with peers, and so on. Constructionism, developed by

Seymour Papert, is based on the contention that knowledge is not directly transmitted from

teachers to students, but is constructed by students themselves through their interactions with the

environment. Constructionism suggests that learners make new ideas when they are actively

engaged in making some type of external artifacts. The theoretical foundation of

constructionism has deeply influenced educators and researchers in education. Although

constructionist ideas were developed in the 1980s, constructionism is one of the central topics in

the field of education. The ideas that children actively construct new knowledge as they interact

with objects in physical and a digital world are accepted by researchers, and a lot of research are

studying how children learn in various conditions of environments. This paper explains the

meaning of constructionism and the distinction from constructivism and instructionism.

Furthermore, in this paper, the principles of constructionism are described and the principles of

constructionist learning are explained how can be applied in a digital world by illustrating the

software applications, Logo, Scratch, and Globaloria.

Keywords: constructionism, constructionist learning, Logo, Scratch, Globaloria


Introduction

Many learning scientists agree with the notion that learning which occurs by learners’

self-directed engagement in the natural environment is more effective than learning which

transmits knowledge from teachers to students in the formal context. Researchers in LS have

focused on the importance of learning through interaction with the physical, social, and cultural

world (Nathan & Alibali, 2010). Cognitive scientists have studied how learners construct their

knowledge and experience the process of interacting with the environments. In the cognitive

perspective, “knowledge is seen as a structure consisting of different concepts, and learning was

the acquisition of abilities such as reasoning, planning, solving problems, and comprehending

language” (Johri & Olds, 2011, p.155). The situative perspective considers participation in

communities more important. According the situative perspective, learning is conducted through

situated engagement in motivated action, using tools, and interaction with others (Johri & Olds,

2011).

Many learning scientists concur with the idea that learning is conducted more

successfully when learners actively participate in learning contexts in which they do practical

activities like using tools, solving tasks, and working on projects with others (Packer, 2010).

Design activities are one of these self-directed activities. When learners design something, their

learning becomes instrumental to a larger intellectual and social goal (Kafai, 1996). Learning

through design is based on constructionism theory. Constructionism is a theory of learning that

emphasizes learners’ active engagement in design activities. The perspective of constructionism

is that learners learn best when they are building external and sharable artifacts, such as

computer programs, machines, or games, with others (Papert, 1993).


In order that learning theories can be useful and utilized in the real educational

environment, learning scientists should put effort to study how to apply the theories to the real

environment. Today’s digital technologies have changed not only our life-style, but also our

learning environments. The Web is a vast source of information, communication, and

connection opportunities. Learning scientists should consider features of learning in the digital

world. Constructionist learning theories have applied to the digital world. Papert, known as the

father of educational technology, created the programming language Logo. Logo, which has

been closely associated with constructionism, has been used by many children all over the world.

This paper explains the meaning and two principles of Constructionism and describes the

constructionist theory can be applied in a digital world by illustrating three software applications.

What is Constructionism?

In the 1960’s, Seymour Papert and his colleagues undertook a research project at

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to study how children think and learn and to

develop educational approaches and technological tools to help children learn. The research

efforts have resulted in the theory, constructionism, which has had great effect on educators’

viewpoints of how children can learn. Kafai (1996) stated that “children don’t get ideas; they

make ideas” (p.1). Constructionism is both a theory of learning and a strategy of teaching. It

builds on the “constructivist” theories of Jean Piaget, asserting that knowledge is not transmitted

from teacher to student, but actively constructed by the students. Constructionism suggests that

learners are actively engaged in making some type of external artifacts, such as a robot, a poem,

a picture, a handcraft, or a computer program, which they can manifest in and share with others

(Kafai, 1996). Papert’s constructionism views learning as building relationships between old and

new knowledge while creating artifacts of social relevance and interacting with others (Kafai,


2012). Constructionism can best be understood when compared to other learning theories,

constructivism and instructionism.

Constructionism seems to be similar to constructivism. Constructivism is a learning

theory that explains how knowledge is constructed in the human being when information comes

into contact with existing knowledge. “Constructivism is an educational philosophy which holds

that learners ultimately construct their own knowledge that then resides within them, so that each

person's knowledge is as unique as they are” (Oregon Technology in Education Council,

Constructivism section, 2002, para.2). However, Papert (1991) explains the distinction between

constructionism and Piaget’s constructivism:

[C]onstructionism – the N Word as opposed to the V word – shares constructivism’s

connotation to learning as building knowledge structures irrespective of the

circumstances of learning. It then adds the idea that this happens especially

felicitously in a context where the learner is consciously engaged in constructing a

public entity whether it’s a sand castle on the beach or a theory of the universe. (p.1)

Papert’s constructionism is more situated and more pragmatic than Piaget’s constructivism.

Constructivism focuses on the knowledge development through learners’ understanding in their

own knowledge and experience. Piaget’s constructivism tends not to consider the role and

necessity of contexts, tools, and media in learning. Papert’s approach helps us understand how

the knowledge is constructed when learners do activities in particular contexts and use

technology tools. Constructionist theory suggests a connection between designing and learning.

It asserts that designing, involving producing, making, or programming, can provide a rich

context of learning. “Constructionist theory goes beyond Piaget’s constructivism in its emphasis

on artifacts, asserting that meaning-construction happens particularly well when learners are


engaged in building external and sharable artifacts” (Kafai, 1996, p.4). Papert (1980) saw the

computer as the tool that could make the abstract of intelligence concrete.

Stated most simply, my conjecture is that the computer can concretize (and

personalize) the formal. Seen in this light, it is not just another powerful educational

tool. It is unique in providing us with the means for addressing what Piaget and many

others see as the obstacle which is overcome in the passage from child to adult

thinking. (p.21)

Papert (1991) contends that learning is meaningful and effective when learners share their ideas

and understanding with others, as he mentioned “for the more we share the less improbable it is

that our self-constructed constructions should converge” (p.1).

Constructionism is often described in the opposition to instructionism. Instructionism

refers to all of the educational theories based on the idea of the teacher teaching, usually

according to a predetermined schedule. This includes any form of rote learning and most forms

of book learning in actual use, as well as drill and practice. Papert explains constructionist

learning as learning without curriculum in which the children build their own intellectual

structures with materials drawn from the surrounding culture. Papert (1993) assumes that

“children will do best by finding for themselves the specific knowledge they need; organized or

informal education can help most by making sure they are supported morally, psychologically,

materially, and intellectually in their efforts” (p.4).

Papert (1993) accounts for the principle of constructionism by illustrating an African

proverb. If a man is hungry, you can give him a fish in the perspective of instructionism.

Whereas, in the perspective of constructionism, you give him a line and teach him to catch fish

himself. In constructionist learning, it is better that students learn how they catch fish and what


skills they need to learn by their experiences. Constructionist attitude to teaching does not mean

that instruction is not useful or dismissive. Constructionism emphasizes learning that students

acquire knowing from making or doing something in the natural context, rather than teaching

that teachers convey knowledge to students with structured instruction.

Application of the principles of Constructionism in a digital world

We can elicit the principles of constructionist theory from the definition of

constructionism. The theory of constructionism has two main principles (Papert, 1993; Kafai

1996):

1. Learning is most effective when leaners construct their own understanding by making

something.

2. Learning is most effective when learners share their knowledge with others.

This paper illustrates the practical applications of these principles in the digital world.

First, Logo programming language is introduced to show how students can learn in

programming. Second, Scratch shows the learning through design media production. Finally,

Globaloria demonstrates how learners can improve their ability and knowledge in the nature of

digital communities.

Logo and learning in programming

In the early 1980’s, there was educational software in schools. The educational software

was a ready-made program to teach content to students. However, Logo enabled students to

create their own programs and express their ideas. Kafai (2012) describes that “learning with

Logo promised to offer more than just learning to program: it included learning about your own

thinking and learning, and learning mathematics and science in conceptually new ways” (p.37).

Logo is a graphic oriented educational programming language, designed in 1967 by Daniel G.


Bobrow, Wally Feurzeig, Seymour Papert, and Cynthia Solomon. Logo language is known for

its use of "turtle graphics," in which commands for movement and drawing produced line

graphics either on a screen or with a small robot called a "turtle." The turtle, a robotic creature,

can be directed by typing commands into the computer. The command “forward 100” causes the

turtle to move forward in a straight line 100 “turtle steps.” “Right 45” rotates the turtle 45

degrees clockwise while leaving it in the same place on the floor. The turtle migrated to the

computer screen as a graphics object. The turtle on the screen moves by the commands, such as

“forward 10,” “right 90,” “repeat 4 [forward 50 right 90],” or “repeat 36 [right 10 square]” (Logo

foundation, 2012, para.1).

One of the prominent features of Logo programming is that a program can be used as a

transition to understand abstract and complex concepts, such as the concept of function in

mathematics (Valente, 2003). For example, the child instructs the turtle to draw a square using

the Logo command, “square.” The square program can be seen as a mathematical function that

maps all integer numbers into squares of corresponding sizes. The children can comprehend the

concept of mathematical function in a practical and concrete manner through programming.

The Logo turtle served as a first representative of formal mathematics for children

because they concentrate their knowledge on how to move the turtle (Kafai, 2012). Children

execute programming the movement of the turtle as they manipulate their bodies in the physical

world. Papert called this feature “syntonic learning.”

For example, the Turtle circle is body syntonic in that the circle is firmly related to

children’s sense and knowledge about their own bodies. Or it is ego syntonic in that

it is coherent with children’s sense of themselves as people with intentions, goals,


desires, likes and dislikes. A child draws a Turtle circle wants to draw the circle;

doing it produces pride and excitement. (Papert, 1993, p.63)

When children conduct programming activities like Logo, they are engaged in a process

of problem solving. To solve the problem, they need to go through the cycle of description-

execution-reflection-debugging-description. Description is the problem’s solution in terms of

the programming language, execution of this description is done by the computer, reflection is on

what has been produced by the computer, debugging fixes the previous version, and producing

creates a new program version (Valente, 2003). This cycle presents characteristics that are

understood as construction of new knowledge. First, the user gives commands to the computer

to solve the problem using their entire knowledge structure. Second, the computer executes

orders given to it and responds to the result of the program. Third, if there is any error in the

result, the user searches for bugs in his/her program, getting more information to modify the

previously defined description. This accurate feedback is important for the learner to be aware

of what parts of his/her idea are wrong and what kinds of information are needed to correct it. In

this way, “the process of finding and correcting the mistake is a unique opportunity for the

learner to learn about a specific concept involved in the solution of the problem or about problem

solving strategies” (Valente, 2003, p.133).


Figure 1. Logo programming with the turtle.

(http://el.media.mit.edu/logo-foundation/logo/turtle.html).

Scratch and learning through design

The metaphor of “learning through design” has been used in constructionist learning.

Learners can learn effectively through design artifacts. Kafai (1996) explained that “the learning

through design is not exclusively represented in the final product, but also in the process of doing

it” (p.73). In learning through design, the process is more important than the final product. Even

though students may not achieve making successful products, the process that students have

engaged in is important for them because they have thought like designers and conducted

designers’ tasks: planning their projects, finding problems, discovering the solutions of the

problems, and refining their original plans or strategies during designing their products. In this

process, students can extend their old knowledge and construct their new knowledge.

The educational literature shows the benefit when learners participate in the designing

process and there are many studies that prove the positive outputs. Boyer summarized the

benefit of designing multimedia to learners (Table 1). Students become motivated, develop

research skills (finding, analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing information), represent content

in an expert-like manner, develop metacognitive and reflective skills, increase self-efficacy, and

take responsibility for their learning (Boyer, 2010).

These studies have caused the development of a number of tools with which learners, not

professional programmers, can easily produce their multimedia. One of these multimedia


designing tools is Scratch. Scratch, which is a project of the Lifelong Kindergarten Group at the

MIT Media Lab, is a visual programming environment in which users create interactive, media-

rich projects. The Scratch application is used to create projects containing media and scripts.

Images and sounds can be imported or created in Scratch using a built-in paint tool and sound

recorder. Programming is done by snapping together colorful command blocks to control 2-D

graphical objects called sprites, moving on a background called the stage. Scratch projects can

be saved to the file system or shared on the Scratch Web site (Maloney et al., 2010).

The Scratch website states, “Scratch helps young people create and share Scratch

projects, they learn important mathematical and computational ideas, while also learning to think

creatively, reason systematically, and work collaboratively” (http://scratch.mit.edu).

Peppler and Kafai (2007) conducted the case studies of using Scratch at a Computer

Clubhouse in South Central Los Angeles. They investigated how urban youth could learn the

principal ideas of media education in informal contexts. They illustrate the vignettes of these

case studies to show how a constructionist tool and context for media production, like Scratch,

can encourage youth to create their meaningful projects. They demonstrate youths’ learning

through developing the media production as follows:

He has learned how to design for interactive play and has redesigned his program several

times, discovering that it can be friendlier for the user to design a game that responds to

standard key strokes (e.g., right and left arrow keys) rather than random characters on the

keyboard. Jorge has also learned how to participate in the distributed online culture

specific to designing and making videogames. Scratch has facilitated his understanding

of how games are made by professional production specialists and he has also networked


with other fans, like himself, who want to create amateur productions. (Peppler & Kafai,

2007, p.156)

Table 1. Summary of outcomes when learners design hypermedia/multimedia (BOYER, 2010, p.41).

Outcome Author(s)Students become motivated. Beichner (1994); Liu & Rutledge (1997);

McGrath, Cumaranatunge, Ji, Chen,Broce & Wright (1997); Liu & Pederson(1998); Orey, Fan, Scott, Thuma,Robertshaw, Hogle, Tzeng & Crenshaw(2000); Brown (2007)

Students spend additional timeoutside of class to work on projects.

Liu & Rutledge (1997)

Students develop research skills:finding, analyzing, evaluating andsynthesizing information.

Lehrer, Erickson & Connell (1994);Beichner (1994); Erickson (1997)

Students represent content in anexpert-like manner.

Spoehr (1993); Liu & Pederson (1998)

Students represent content inmultiple ways.

Hay, Guzdial, Jackson, Boyle & Soloway(1994); Chen & McGrath (2003)

Students develop metacognitive andreflective skills.

Liu & Pederson (1998); Chen & McGrath(2003); Brown (2007)

Students develop design skills Carver, Lehrer, Connell & Erickson(1992); Erickson (1997); Liu & Pederson(1998); Liu & Hsiao (2002)

Students engage in content. Lehrer, Erickson & Connell (1994);Beichner (1994); McGrath,Cumaranatunge, Ji, Chen, Broce &Wright (1997); Mitchell, Andreata &Capella (2004)

Students reduce off-task behaviors. Lehrer, Erickson & Connell (1994); Liu &Rutledge (1997)

Students increase self-efficacy. Liu & Rutledge (1997)Students take responsibility for theirlearning.

McGrath, Cumaranatunge, Ji, Chen,Broce & Wright (1997)

Students develop collaborationskills.

Liu & Pederson (1998); Orey, Fan, Scott,Thuma, Robertshaw, Hogle, Tzeng &Crenshaw (2000); Liu & Hsiao (2002)

Students develop writing skills. Garthwait (2007)


Figure 2. The Scratch interface (Boyer, 2010, p.44).

Figure 3. A script created in Scratch (Boyer, 2010, p.45).

Globaloria and learning in communities

Constructionist theory emphasizes collaborative learning, which can be constructing

knowledge, producing artifacts, or sharing ideas, and places a lot of attention to learning in

communities. Papert (1993) mentioned the Brazilian samba school as an example of a

community of learning in his book, Mindstorms. The Brazilian samba schools are social clubs,

not schools, which require memberships. Members of a samba school gather together on


weekends to dance, to drink, and to meet friends. Even though members of a samba school

range in age, from children to the elderly, and in ability, from novice to professional, they dance

together. They collaboratively learn and teach in the samba school (Papert, 1993).

This principle of constructionism has influenced the emergence of the theory of social

constructionism. Shaw (1996) describes the social constructionist paradigm as a three-part

synergy. To social constructionism, the social setting itself is an evolving construction. The

social setting is a context of “social relations and cultural materials”. When “sociocultural

activities and processes” act in the social setting, developmental “internalized and externalized

constructs” can be formed. Each of these components- “social relations and cultural materials,

sociocultural activities and processes, and internalized and externalized constructs”- are strongly

related and mutually reinforcing (Shaw, 1996, p.181).

Constructionism is based on the idea that learners can learn more effectively when they

make personally meaningful artifacts and share their ideas and products with others. Sharing the

ideas is important because it helps learners have an opportunity to reflect on and refine their

ideas. Today, sharing activities is more dynamic in the virtual world, for example, Facebook,

Twitter, YouTube and so on. This aspect influences the development of educational programs

online. One of them is Globaloria (www.Globaloria.org), a program that is based on the research

of Idit Harel Caperton and established by the World Wide Workshop in 2006. Globaloria is an

educational intervention for students to develop learning abilities by designing and building

original web games in a wiki-based networked environment. Globaloria is a social learning

network where students develop STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) knowledge

and global workforce skills through game design and development. In Globarloria, students can

design, research, program, use team work, engage in production process, take an original idea to


final product, and develop self-paced digital curriculum. Students and teachers are supported by

experts and peers while they work on the process. Students can learn technology literacy,

scientific thinking, STEM academic contents, and college and career readiness skills (World

Wide Workshop, 2012).

Globaloria uses open-source software, such as Google resources and capabilities,

Blogger, and Youtube. Practicing open-source software enables students to collaborate with the

global developer community for future enhancements and for customization to diverse cultures

and languages (Harel Caperton, 2012). Globaloria focuses on developing educational programs

in the way of engaging in social and collaborative learning. Harel Caperton (2012) explains

Globaloria as follows:

Our design of the Globaloria model, for example, seeks to exploit that finding

through constructionist principles of hands-on, DIY learning, blended with project-

based teaching—both of which are by nature and definition social processes…. This

is true social learning: A networked social media platform (with social profiles,

learning logs, blogs, project spaces, file- and image-sharing, digital textbook and

tutorials, virtual resources, helpdesk and experts) is the vehicle for acquiring

mathematics, design, engineering, science and civics content in compliance with any

state-mandated standards and the new Common Core standards—as well as for

acquiring social skills of collaboration, and the habits of team-driven analytical

thinking and problem-solving. (pp.7-8)

The World Wide Workshop has studied the impact of learning in Globaloria across the

country since 2006. They have showed that Globaloria has had a positive influence on the

educational improvement and students’ learning.


1. Students report greater knowledge and motivation towards contemporary learning

abilities.

2. Globaloria creates the conditions for a shift toward self-directed and collaborative

learning.

3. Teachers develop and implement new, transferable instructional styles and skills.

4. Globaloria builds student interest in STEM careers and capacity to achieve in a

technology-driven world.

5. Participation in Globaloria eliminates computer usage gaps among students,

narrowing the digital divide.

6. Particular gains are found among girls, who enroll in Globaloria at a higher rate

than the national average. (Harel Caperton, 2012, pp.39-40)

Figure 4. Interconnected platforms supporting collaborative learning in Globaloria.

Discussion

Constructionism focuses on the student’s self-directed learning without instruction of

teachers. Constructionists believe that learning is more effective when the students recognize the

problem and find the solution on their own initiative. The constructionist theory seems to

disregard instruction of a teacher as important, although constructionists say that they do not

ignore “instruction.” Kafai (2012) suggests that the teacher and students engage in design and


discussion of learning artifacts (p.36). In this regard, the studies of how the teacher can instruct

students and of what practical guide will be developed to facilitate constructing their knowledge

using the theory of constructionism need to be conducted.

Technology is an important tool as “objects-to-think-with” in constructionist learning, for

example, digital media, video games, computer programming, and so on. This technology is

often utilized to apply constructionist learning principles to the educational context. Some issues

are brought up in the process of application of constructionism in the virtual environment. For

instance, game design learning is often mentioned in order to explain and adapt the

constructionism theory. In general, girls lack game-playing experience because many girls do

not seem to enjoy playing games, and it might influence learning through making video

programs. In some programming in the virtual environment, special technical skills, not for

novice programmers, are required. More flexible and various programming tool kits should be

developed for considering diverse interests and tastes, and the level of skills of users.

In the article of William and Chapman (2009), they mentioned some barriers to

integration of technology into schools. The barriers are referred as a lack in sufficient numbers

of equipment, limited access to the computers, access to appropriate technical supports, specific

technology knowledge and skill, technology-supported pedagogical knowledge and skill, and

classroom management skills related to the use of technology (p.42). To put the principles of

constructionist learning to good use in the school environment, a further pragmatic strategy

should be studied.

Conclusion

In the 1960’s, Seymour Papert established the theory, Constructionism. He explains

constructionism contrasted to constructivism and instructionism. While constructivism focuses


on the development of individual and isolated knowledge structures, constructionism focuses on

the connected nature of knowledge with its personal and social dimensions. Constructionism

differs from instructionism in that students can best learn for themselves without teachers’

instruction or curriculum. The core principles of constructionist learning are learning is most

effective when leaners construct their own understanding by making something and when

learners share their knowledge with others.

This paper illustrates three examples of how to put the constructionist learning theory

into practice in the digital world. Logo, the education software program language, enables

students to learn to create their own program. Scratch, the visual programming environment,

helps students learn important mathematical and computational ideas while they create and share

Scratch projects. Globaloria is the social network in which students can improve social skills of

collaboration as well as knowledge of STEM.

This paper also discusses the further studies needed for using the principles of

constructionist learning, for developing more flexible and various programming tool kits for

considering diverse interests, tastes, and levels of skills of users, and for creating a pragmatic

strategy for applying the theory of constructionism to the school environment.


Reference

Boyer, J. (2010). Using Scratch For Learner-Constructed Multimedia: A Designbased

Research Inquiry Of Constructionism In Practice: University Of Florida: Proquest LLC.

Harel Caperton, I. (2012). Learning to Make Games for Impact. The Journal of Media

Literacy 59 (1): 34.

Harel Caperton,I, Oliver,A., &Sullivan,S.(2010). A Blueprint for Global Learning and

Leadership in the 21st Century:Transforming Education Through the Globaloria

Learning Network. (2009-2010 Annual Report). NewYork,

NY:WorldWideWorkshopFoundation. Retrieved from

http://www.worldwideworkshop.org/rep/wwworkshop_annual_report_2010.pdf.

Harel Caperton,I. (2012). Learning to Make Games for Impact. The Jounal of Media Literacy.

Vol 59. No 1. 28-38. Retrieved from

http://www.worldwideworkshop.org/pdfs/Journal_of_Media_Literacy_2012.pdf.

Johri, A., & Olds, B.M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering

education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education. 100(1),

151-185.

Kafai, Y. B., Resnick, M. & Shaw, A. (1996). Constructionism in practice. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kafai, Yasmin B. (2012). Constructionism. The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning

Sciences. 35-46.

Logo Foundation. (2012). A Logo Primer or What’s the Turtles?. Retrieved from

http://el.media.mit.edu/logo-foundation/logo/turtle.html.


Maloney, J.T., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., and Eastmond, E. (2010). The scratch

programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing

Education, Vol. 10, No. 4, Article 16.

Mathan, M.J. & Alibali, M.W. (2010). Learning sciences. WIREs Cognitive Science, 1 (May),

329-345.

MIT Media Lab. (n.d.). About Scratch. Retrieved from http://scratch.mit.edu/about/.

Oregon Technology in Education Council. (2002). Learning Theories and Transfer of Learning.

Retrieved from http://otec.uoregon.edu/learning_theory.htm.

Packer, M. & Maddox, C. (2010) The learning sciences as a setting for learning. The

constitution of a learning scientist.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms (2nd ed.).New York: Basic Books

Papert, S. (1991). Situating Constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism

(pp. 1–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New

York: Basic Books.

Peppler, K. A. & Kafai, Y. B. (2007). From SuperGoo to Scratch: exploring creative digital

media production in informal learning: Learning, Media and Technology l. 32, No. 2,

149–166 :Routledge

Reynolds, R. & Harel Caperton, I. (2011) Contrasts in student engagement, meaning-making,

dislikes, and challenges in a discovery-based program of game design learning,

Association for Educational Communications and Technology.


Valente, J. A. (2003). How Logo has Contributed to the Understanding of the Role of

Informatics in Education and its Relation to the Learning Process. Informatics in

Education. 2003, Vol. 2, No. 1, 123–138.

William E. Chapman Jr., Ed. D. (2009) Administrative Perspectives on Technology

Integration: the Globaloria: MyGLife Program in West Virginia : Dissertation

Publishing.

World Wide Workshop. (2012). Globaloria. Retrieved from

http://www.globaloria.org/images/docs/GlobaloriaOverview.pdf.

Documents

yukyongportfolio.weebly.comyukyongportfolio.weebly.com/.../chung_finaldraft.docx · Web viewConstructionism is a theory of learning that emphasizes learners’ active engagement