Constructivist learning theory predicts that knowledge encoded from data by learners themselves will be more flexible, transferable, and useful than knowledge encoded for them by experts and transmitted to them by an instructor or other delivery agent. If this prediction is correct, then learners should be modeled as scientists and use the reasoning and technologies of scientists to construct their own knowledge. However, it cannot be taken for granted that the prediction is correct, or correct in every knowledge domain. The present study attempts to establish conditions in which the prediction can be operationalized and tested. It reports on the adaptation of constructivist principles to instructional design in a particular domain, second language vocabulary acquisition. Students learning English for academic purposes in the Sultanate of Oman followed one of two approaches to vocabulary expansion, learning pre-encoded dictionary definitions of words, or constructing definitions for themselves using an adapted version of the computational tools of lexicographers. After 12 weeks, both groups were equal in definitional knowledge of target words, but lexicography group students were more able to transfer their word knowledge to novel contexts.

Examines the history, characteristics, and value of designed instruction that is grounded in behaviorist, cognitive science, and constructivist theory. Changes that have allowed developmental phases of instructional design are considered, including instructional design methodology, physical technology, and programing mechanisms used to develop instructional software.

Key words: behaviorism, instructional design, constructivism, conceptual frameworks, computer software, cognitive models, machine learning, computer based instruction, cognitivism, learning modules.

Key words: constructivism, learning, constructivist literature, instructional design, learner controlled instruction, educational environment, electronic classrooms, public schools, outcomes of education, educational strategies.

The way we define learning and what we believe about the way learning occurs has important implications for situations in which we want to facilitate changes in what people know and/ or do. Learning theories provide instructional designers with verified instructional strategies and techniques for facilitating learning as well as a foundation for intelligent strategy selection. Yet many designers are operating under the constraints of a limited theoretical background. This paper is an attempt to familiarize designers with three relevant positions on learning (behavioral, cognitive, and constructivist) which provide structured foundations for planning and conducting instructional design activities. Each learning perspective is discussed in terms of its specific interpretation of the learning process and the resulting implications for instructional designers and educational practitioners. The information presented here provides the reader with a comparison of these three different viewpoints and illustrates how these differences might be translated into practical applications in instructional situations.

Abstract: It is trendy to be a “ constructivist,” although this designation is not very illuminating, since very divergent positions are subsumed under this lobe!. In order to arrive at a more precise idea of what constructivism is or might be, exemplary text passages taken from the discussion of radical constructivism in the United States in the past few years are analyzed. Against the background of two contrasting epistemological positions (“objectivism” and “ constructivism”), constructivism in the field of education defines itself by its reference to constructivist epistemology and by the assumption that instructional design can be deduced, as it were, from an epistemology. This “ deduction assumption,” though, leads to a problematic confounding of epistemological and pedagogical perspectives – this is especially true of the central concept of “construction” – and to an apparent antithesis of “ objectivistic” and “constructivistic” instructional design. Constructivism’s dichotomic approach permeates all spheres of instructional design and tends to lead to a lack of necessary differentiation and to obscure relevant pedagogic problems and contexts. Therefore, it is proposed to dispense with the concept of “constructivism” in the pedagogic field altogether and to join instead Greeno’s search for a synthesis of cognitive psychology and situated learning.

Discussion of constructivism and instructional design focuses on the development of a design model for constructivist environments that supports the construction of knowledge, a meaningful context for learning, and collaboration among learners and with the teacher. Differences between constructivist and objectivist approaches are considered.

Key words: constructivism (learning), context effect, cooperative learnin, g educational environment, instructional design, models, teacher-student relationship.

Discussion of constructivism and instructional design focuses on the development of a design model for constructivist environments that supports the construction of knowledge, a meaningful context for learning, and collaboration among learners and with the teacher. Differences between constructivist and objectivist approaches are considered.

Excerpt: It is said that there’s nothing so practical as good theory. It may also be said that there’s nothing so theoretically interesting as good practice. This is particularly true of efforts to relate constructivism as a theory of learning to the practice of instruction. Our goal in this chapter is to provide a clear link between the theoretical principles of constructivism, the practice of instructional design, and the practice of teaching. We will begin with a basic characterization of constructivism, identifying what we believe to be the central principles in learning and understanding. We will then identify and elaborate on eight instructional principles for the design of a constructivist learning environment. Finally, we will examine what we consider to be one of the best exemplars of a constructivist learning environment – Problem Based Learning, as described by Barrows (1985, 1986, 1992).

Purpose: This paper aims to present an approach from first principles to the design of learning experiences in interactive learning environments, that is learning designs in the broadest sense. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is based on conversation theory CT, a theory of learning and teaching with principled foundations in cybernetics. The approach to learning design that is proposed is not dissimilar from other approaches such as that proposed by Rowntree. However, its basis in CT provides a coherent theoretical underpinning. Findings: Currently, in the world of e-learning, the terms instructional design and learning design are used to refer to the application of theories of learning and instruction to the creation of e-learning material and online learning experiences. The paper examines the roots of the two terms and discusses similarities and differences in usage. It then discusses how the processes of learning design fit into the larger processes of course, design, development and delivery. It goes on to examine the concept of a learning design pattern. Originality/value – The paper contends that, whilst learning design patterns are useful as starting-points for individual learning designs, learning designers should adopt the cybernetic principles of reflective practice – as expressed in CT – to create learning designs where received wisdom is enriched by contextual feedback from colleagues and learners.

Key words: Cybernetics, Learning, Design

This paper examines the characteristics and value of designed instruction grounded in the constructivist theory. It also attempts to connect the theory to the prevailing technology paradigms to establish an alignment between pedagogical and technological considerations in support of the assumptions arising from constructivism. Distance learning provides a unique context in which to infuse constructivist principles where learners are expected to function as self-motivated, self-directed, interactive, collaborative participants in their learning experiences by virtue of their physical location. Hence, the aim of this paper is to provide a clear link between the theoretical principles of constructivism, the construction of technology-supported learning environments, and the practice of distance education. The questions driving the argument in this paper include: What do constructivist perspectives offer instructional design and practice? What do computing technologies offer? And what do the two afford in combination? In particular, how do the two combine to transform distance learning from a highly industrialized mass production model to one that emphasizes subjective construction of knowledge and meaning derived from individual experiences.

Key words: constructivism, educational environment, distance education, collaborative learning, instructional design, teachers, environmental technology, learning experiences, cognition.