Constructing Constructivist Online Learning Environments
Introduction
If in order to learn, a person must construct their own understanding, via experimentation and discovery, then the traditional notion of an instructor delivering knowledge to a student is impractical. Thus the role of an instructor within a fully online constructivist learning environment must be that of a consultant, one who aids students in the investigation and conceptualization of knowledge on their own. For this reason, a constructivist online learning environment must not be centered on the traditional model, in which an expert instructor uses various methods to deliver already assembled knowledge to the students, but on a model that allows students to collaborate with one another, as well as with their instructor, in order to construct their own knowledge.
Contrasting Paradigms
Before forging ahead, it is useful to first look back. As Jonassen et al. (1995) describes, the traditional thinking by psychologists had been that learning is developed through a symbolic reasoning paradigm (p. 8). A competing paradigm, situated learning, has since emerged, based on constructivist, rather than cognitive, theory. Jonassen et al. (1995) contrasts these paradigms in this way: learning via the symbolic reasoning paradigm is accomplished by an expert who maps their knowledge onto the students’ thinking patterns, thus students learn in an abstract and symbolic manner; whereas learning via the situated learning paradigm strives for bottom up instruction where the students learn from their own authentic experiences (pp. 9-10). In other words, the students should not be learning solely from the instructor’s experiences, they should be developing knowledge through their own experiences, which can be in the real world, or within a constructivist learning environment.
Objectives of an optimal constructivist online learning environment
In order to formulate an optimal constructivist online learning environment, one must first define the goals of that system, which include both what that system requires and what it does not need. First and foremost, the learning environment must be fit for its purpose – namely, students shall be able to learn with some level of efficiency. Also important is that the environment facilitates the constructivist learning theory – students shall be able to interact socially online with one another and with the instructor; also, students shall be able to construct their knowledge from their environment through discovery and experimentation. On the other hand, students shall not rely on the instructor (or for that matter other students) to deliver knowledge to them – students must strive for a level of autonomy not typical of traditional, cognitive learning environments.
Requirement 1: Students shall be able to learn with some level of efficiency
Many online environments are simply unsuitable for constructivist learning. For example, some message boards and blogs depend on a “host” to filter and manage content, as well as serve as the expert on the subject being discussed. As a learning environment, these online concepts run counter to the constructivist idea that the environment should be centered on the student and not the instructor. Similarly, video, audio, or print lectures that are posted or streamed on a website would not allow the student to develop his or her own understanding – the student would simply be delivered the instructor’s knowledge and be required to regurgitate it.
In order for a student to learn online in an efficient, constructivist manner, the learning environment must be available, responsive, and student-focused. In most cases, it is also beneficial for a learning environment to be secure and safe.
An available and responsive online learning environment would utilize the proper server or cloud computing power and bandwidth to ensure that when the maximum stress is put on the system, it will not return errors or abnormal ends – no adult wants to deal with the aggravation of a learning environment that is not as available and responsive as the average website. Students tend to lose interest in an online environment that takes too long to load or is too difficult to navigate – these considerations must be taken into account in order for the environment to be truly student-focused. Parchoma (2003) lists several practical factors that can increase the usability of a student-centered learning environment (that would not interfere with the constructivist methodologies) including designing help pages that are both informative and specific (sadly, many are neither), avoiding the use of terms or metaphors that would confuse or even offend learners from other cultures, and making sure that “interface features can cope with unexpected user choices” (p. 40).
Another way for an online environment to be student-focused is for it to allow the student to make meaningful choices. In order to discover knowledge, the student must have the means to choose a direction that he or she can best relate to in the real world. As Huang (2002) states, “constructivism offers students more freedom to select and arrange their learning processes with other learners” (p. 33). Therefore, the student-focused environment must allow multiple students to collaborate and make choices together. For example, a wiki or an online whiteboard may be ways that a group of students can meaningfully collaborate online.
Security is an important element in all of adult education, since adults especially dislike failing in front of others, particularly in front of a group of strangers. An online learning environment must be able to provide a community where all are comfortable in expressing their ideas, where opinions are not labeled as wrong, and as Herrington, Oliver, and Reeves (2003) suggest, where “competing solutions and diversity of outcome” are possible (p. 62). Furthermore, Bryceson (2007) suggests that students should not feel “intimidated or threatened” and that the instructor must be able to inspire trust – no small task when distance education typically combines a wide demographic of students, from all parts of the world, who may never see or even speak to one another (p. 202). It is in security and safety that an instructor can be either of great use – when he or she interjects to uphold both – or of utter uselessness – when he or she stands silently by as students discourage, ridicule, or dominate one another.
Requirement 2: Students shall be able to interact socially online with one another & instructor
As Huang (2002) points out, technology-based distance education in general, and online distance education in particular, tend to have less humanity due to the lack of visual and/or verbal interaction with the instructor and class members, and tend to isolate the students socially (p. 31). So if one is to develop an environment suitable for social interaction, it must then counteract these tendencies. To do this, one can simply look at those online technologies that foster social interaction and then either utilize these technologies, or some element of them, in order to design an appropriate learning environment. Yet if that technology distracts the student from the first requirement, it should be implemented differently or not at all.
Hand in hand with social interaction, the student must further be willing to actively engage him or herself with the process of learning when in an online constructivist learning environment. The passive learning style of listening to lectures, watching videos, or reading texts, must be replaced by an active learning style which includes searching for information from a variety of sources, testing hypotheses, and collaborating with peers. A constructivist learning style, as Huang (2002) points out, requires the student to actively reflect on past learning experiences and implement learning activities in real life situations (p. 34). A person can study project management, even obtain a project management certification, such as a PMP, but until that person implements project management principles by actually managing a project, that person will not have truly learned how to manage a project. Real world implementations are vital.
Requirement 3: Students shall be able to construct their knowledge from their environment
As more and more Web 2.0 technologies are created and refined, more and more online tools allow for a person to experiment and interact, instead of just passively receiving information fed through traditional web pages and news groups. These tools can be leveraged to provide an online constructivist learning environment. The instructor and/or instructional designer must take care to ensure that they are not, as Petraglia (1998) warns, providing their version of an authentic environment, but should only try to persuade students that a problem is worthy of investigation and then guide them, if needed, to the student’s authentic means of investigating the problem (p. 53). Failure to do this, constructivists like Petraglia contend, will not lead to the true construction of individual knowledge for students, even if they can successfully complete or comprehend the learning task or participate in the learning environment.
Like Petraglia, Herrington, Oliver, & Reeves (2003) are supporters of an authentic, constructivist learning environment, but they contend that Petraglia is too extreme. Their studies led them to conclude that students are able to suspend disbelief in performing a staged learning activity, just as moviegoers are capable of suspending their disbelief in order to enjoy a movie (p. 60). This is an important contention since one cannot truly dissect an animal online, mix two chemicals online, play an instrument online, or participate in an archeological dig online, although one may virtually perform these tasks in a simulated environment. So if a student is willing to suspend disbelief, and rely on the accuracy of the simulated environment, then a truly online, constructivist learning environment can be created.
Examples of possible technologies that can adhere to the basic constructivist principles of learning, such as authentic experimentation and social interaction, include the VUE Visual Understanding Environment, which allows groups to collaborate by collecting and mapping digital information; Second Life, a 3D virtual community that allows for the creation of simulated, interactive environments; and GroupTweet, the narrowcasting version of the popular message broadcasting service Twitter, which allows a group of twitter users to communicate quickly and easily in a private setting.
Of course traditional internet technologies such as e-mail, chat, instant message, message boards, and simple web collaboration tools are also useful, easy to implement, and sound from a constructivist perspective, as they promote both social interaction and collaboration.
Requirement 4: Students shall not rely on the instructor to deliver knowledge to them
Even though he is clearly not a constructivist thinker, Lundin (1998) acknowledges that it is outdated thinking to believe that it is up to teachers to fill students’ minds with knowledge (p. 62). He further contends that it is up to learners to utilize higher order thinking skills in order to manage and analyze the knowledge they are presented within a learning environment (p. 63). While some may contend that it is foolish to rely fully on one’s own experimentation and that it is wasteful not to seek out the thoughts and wisdom of a person who has more life experience, these traditional means of learning can still be an important part of a constructivist learning environment. If a student reads of an experiment conducted by a scientist, the student can attempt to reproduce it and determine if the scientist’s findings were correct. If a student is told of a wise way to invest money, the student can try this for her or himself to see if the financial investor’s wisdom was truly wise. Once the student analyzes the effects of their own attempt to recreate the more experienced person’s method, then the student can truly attain some knowledge.
Conclusion
Of course there are many other possible requirements for constructing the optimal constructivist online learning environment, but in a sense, the best way to determine how to construct one is to attempt to construct such a learning environment oneself. Through experiment and discovery, the instructional designers and/or instructors could collaborate to build an authentic online learning environment that is usable, allows students autonomy, and focuses the learning on the student. Once students entered the learning environment, the instructors and instructional designers could then further collaborate, with the students, to refine the environment.
References
Bryceson, K. (2007). The online learning environment--A new model using social constructivism and the concept of 'Ba' as a theoretical framework. Learning Environments Research, 10(3), 189-206. doi:10.1007/s10984-007-9028-x.
Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59-71. Retrieved online at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.87.971&rep=rep1&
Huang, H. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27-37. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Lundin, R. (1998). Being unreal: Epistemology, ontology, and phenomenology in a virtual educational world. The American Journal of Distance Education, 12(3), 53-65. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Parchoma, G. (2003). Learner-Centered Instructional Design and Development: Two Examples of Success. Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 35-60. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
Petraglia, J. (1998). The real world on a short leash: The (mis) application of constructivism to the design of educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), 53-65. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
If in order to learn, a person must construct their own understanding, via experimentation and discovery, then the traditional notion of an instructor delivering knowledge to a student is impractical. Thus the role of an instructor within a fully online constructivist learning environment must be that of a consultant, one who aids students in the investigation and conceptualization of knowledge on their own. For this reason, a constructivist online learning environment must not be centered on the traditional model, in which an expert instructor uses various methods to deliver already assembled knowledge to the students, but on a model that allows students to collaborate with one another, as well as with their instructor, in order to construct their own knowledge.
Contrasting Paradigms
Before forging ahead, it is useful to first look back. As Jonassen et al. (1995) describes, the traditional thinking by psychologists had been that learning is developed through a symbolic reasoning paradigm (p. 8). A competing paradigm, situated learning, has since emerged, based on constructivist, rather than cognitive, theory. Jonassen et al. (1995) contrasts these paradigms in this way: learning via the symbolic reasoning paradigm is accomplished by an expert who maps their knowledge onto the students’ thinking patterns, thus students learn in an abstract and symbolic manner; whereas learning via the situated learning paradigm strives for bottom up instruction where the students learn from their own authentic experiences (pp. 9-10). In other words, the students should not be learning solely from the instructor’s experiences, they should be developing knowledge through their own experiences, which can be in the real world, or within a constructivist learning environment.
Objectives of an optimal constructivist online learning environment
In order to formulate an optimal constructivist online learning environment, one must first define the goals of that system, which include both what that system requires and what it does not need. First and foremost, the learning environment must be fit for its purpose – namely, students shall be able to learn with some level of efficiency. Also important is that the environment facilitates the constructivist learning theory – students shall be able to interact socially online with one another and with the instructor; also, students shall be able to construct their knowledge from their environment through discovery and experimentation. On the other hand, students shall not rely on the instructor (or for that matter other students) to deliver knowledge to them – students must strive for a level of autonomy not typical of traditional, cognitive learning environments.
Requirement 1: Students shall be able to learn with some level of efficiency
Many online environments are simply unsuitable for constructivist learning. For example, some message boards and blogs depend on a “host” to filter and manage content, as well as serve as the expert on the subject being discussed. As a learning environment, these online concepts run counter to the constructivist idea that the environment should be centered on the student and not the instructor. Similarly, video, audio, or print lectures that are posted or streamed on a website would not allow the student to develop his or her own understanding – the student would simply be delivered the instructor’s knowledge and be required to regurgitate it.
In order for a student to learn online in an efficient, constructivist manner, the learning environment must be available, responsive, and student-focused. In most cases, it is also beneficial for a learning environment to be secure and safe.
An available and responsive online learning environment would utilize the proper server or cloud computing power and bandwidth to ensure that when the maximum stress is put on the system, it will not return errors or abnormal ends – no adult wants to deal with the aggravation of a learning environment that is not as available and responsive as the average website. Students tend to lose interest in an online environment that takes too long to load or is too difficult to navigate – these considerations must be taken into account in order for the environment to be truly student-focused. Parchoma (2003) lists several practical factors that can increase the usability of a student-centered learning environment (that would not interfere with the constructivist methodologies) including designing help pages that are both informative and specific (sadly, many are neither), avoiding the use of terms or metaphors that would confuse or even offend learners from other cultures, and making sure that “interface features can cope with unexpected user choices” (p. 40).
Another way for an online environment to be student-focused is for it to allow the student to make meaningful choices. In order to discover knowledge, the student must have the means to choose a direction that he or she can best relate to in the real world. As Huang (2002) states, “constructivism offers students more freedom to select and arrange their learning processes with other learners” (p. 33). Therefore, the student-focused environment must allow multiple students to collaborate and make choices together. For example, a wiki or an online whiteboard may be ways that a group of students can meaningfully collaborate online.
Security is an important element in all of adult education, since adults especially dislike failing in front of others, particularly in front of a group of strangers. An online learning environment must be able to provide a community where all are comfortable in expressing their ideas, where opinions are not labeled as wrong, and as Herrington, Oliver, and Reeves (2003) suggest, where “competing solutions and diversity of outcome” are possible (p. 62). Furthermore, Bryceson (2007) suggests that students should not feel “intimidated or threatened” and that the instructor must be able to inspire trust – no small task when distance education typically combines a wide demographic of students, from all parts of the world, who may never see or even speak to one another (p. 202). It is in security and safety that an instructor can be either of great use – when he or she interjects to uphold both – or of utter uselessness – when he or she stands silently by as students discourage, ridicule, or dominate one another.
Requirement 2: Students shall be able to interact socially online with one another & instructor
As Huang (2002) points out, technology-based distance education in general, and online distance education in particular, tend to have less humanity due to the lack of visual and/or verbal interaction with the instructor and class members, and tend to isolate the students socially (p. 31). So if one is to develop an environment suitable for social interaction, it must then counteract these tendencies. To do this, one can simply look at those online technologies that foster social interaction and then either utilize these technologies, or some element of them, in order to design an appropriate learning environment. Yet if that technology distracts the student from the first requirement, it should be implemented differently or not at all.
Hand in hand with social interaction, the student must further be willing to actively engage him or herself with the process of learning when in an online constructivist learning environment. The passive learning style of listening to lectures, watching videos, or reading texts, must be replaced by an active learning style which includes searching for information from a variety of sources, testing hypotheses, and collaborating with peers. A constructivist learning style, as Huang (2002) points out, requires the student to actively reflect on past learning experiences and implement learning activities in real life situations (p. 34). A person can study project management, even obtain a project management certification, such as a PMP, but until that person implements project management principles by actually managing a project, that person will not have truly learned how to manage a project. Real world implementations are vital.
Requirement 3: Students shall be able to construct their knowledge from their environment
As more and more Web 2.0 technologies are created and refined, more and more online tools allow for a person to experiment and interact, instead of just passively receiving information fed through traditional web pages and news groups. These tools can be leveraged to provide an online constructivist learning environment. The instructor and/or instructional designer must take care to ensure that they are not, as Petraglia (1998) warns, providing their version of an authentic environment, but should only try to persuade students that a problem is worthy of investigation and then guide them, if needed, to the student’s authentic means of investigating the problem (p. 53). Failure to do this, constructivists like Petraglia contend, will not lead to the true construction of individual knowledge for students, even if they can successfully complete or comprehend the learning task or participate in the learning environment.
Like Petraglia, Herrington, Oliver, & Reeves (2003) are supporters of an authentic, constructivist learning environment, but they contend that Petraglia is too extreme. Their studies led them to conclude that students are able to suspend disbelief in performing a staged learning activity, just as moviegoers are capable of suspending their disbelief in order to enjoy a movie (p. 60). This is an important contention since one cannot truly dissect an animal online, mix two chemicals online, play an instrument online, or participate in an archeological dig online, although one may virtually perform these tasks in a simulated environment. So if a student is willing to suspend disbelief, and rely on the accuracy of the simulated environment, then a truly online, constructivist learning environment can be created.
Examples of possible technologies that can adhere to the basic constructivist principles of learning, such as authentic experimentation and social interaction, include the VUE Visual Understanding Environment, which allows groups to collaborate by collecting and mapping digital information; Second Life, a 3D virtual community that allows for the creation of simulated, interactive environments; and GroupTweet, the narrowcasting version of the popular message broadcasting service Twitter, which allows a group of twitter users to communicate quickly and easily in a private setting.
Of course traditional internet technologies such as e-mail, chat, instant message, message boards, and simple web collaboration tools are also useful, easy to implement, and sound from a constructivist perspective, as they promote both social interaction and collaboration.
Requirement 4: Students shall not rely on the instructor to deliver knowledge to them
Even though he is clearly not a constructivist thinker, Lundin (1998) acknowledges that it is outdated thinking to believe that it is up to teachers to fill students’ minds with knowledge (p. 62). He further contends that it is up to learners to utilize higher order thinking skills in order to manage and analyze the knowledge they are presented within a learning environment (p. 63). While some may contend that it is foolish to rely fully on one’s own experimentation and that it is wasteful not to seek out the thoughts and wisdom of a person who has more life experience, these traditional means of learning can still be an important part of a constructivist learning environment. If a student reads of an experiment conducted by a scientist, the student can attempt to reproduce it and determine if the scientist’s findings were correct. If a student is told of a wise way to invest money, the student can try this for her or himself to see if the financial investor’s wisdom was truly wise. Once the student analyzes the effects of their own attempt to recreate the more experienced person’s method, then the student can truly attain some knowledge.
Conclusion
Of course there are many other possible requirements for constructing the optimal constructivist online learning environment, but in a sense, the best way to determine how to construct one is to attempt to construct such a learning environment oneself. Through experiment and discovery, the instructional designers and/or instructors could collaborate to build an authentic online learning environment that is usable, allows students autonomy, and focuses the learning on the student. Once students entered the learning environment, the instructors and instructional designers could then further collaborate, with the students, to refine the environment.
References
Bryceson, K. (2007). The online learning environment--A new model using social constructivism and the concept of 'Ba' as a theoretical framework. Learning Environments Research, 10(3), 189-206. doi:10.1007/s10984-007-9028-x.
Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59-71. Retrieved online at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.87.971&rep=rep1&
Huang, H. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27-37. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Lundin, R. (1998). Being unreal: Epistemology, ontology, and phenomenology in a virtual educational world. The American Journal of Distance Education, 12(3), 53-65. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Parchoma, G. (2003). Learner-Centered Instructional Design and Development: Two Examples of Success. Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 35-60. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
Petraglia, J. (1998). The real world on a short leash: The (mis) application of constructivism to the design of educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), 53-65. Retrieved from E-Journals database.