Constructivism in Practice

In our resource, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, the authors talked about the instructional strategy that embeds technology: “Generating and Testing Hypotheses.” Our blog assignment is to answer the questions, how does this strategy relate to the constructivist / constructionism learning theories, and then to look back at the learning tools that we explored and how they correlate to the instructional strategy and constructivist / constructionism learning theories.

As stated in our course text, generating and testing hypotheses, we usually think of science class, but when students utilize this strategy in other classes, they are, “engaging in complex mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (Pitler et al, 2007). In order to know if this instructional strategy correlates with the constructivism / constructionism theories, we have to understand what these theories are.

In our DVD, Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Dr. Orey explains Constructivism as “a theory of knowledge stating that each individual actively constructs his/her own meaning. And constructionism as “a theory of learning that states people learn best when they build an external artifact of something they can share” ( Laureate Ed, 2009). Based on the definitions of constructivism/constructionism, the strategy generating, and testing hypotheses definetly correlates with the principles of those learning theories.

When students are asked to create hypotheses, they are making a guess at what they think might happen. In order to prove their hypothesis incorrect or correct, the students must be able to collect data and analyze it. This does not necessarily have to take place in a science class. For instance in my seventh grade Industrial Technology class, my students go through a unit in Structural Engineering. A part of the unit is to predict which bridge will be the most efficient. In order for my students to figure this problem out, they must first collect their data, which includes the weight of the bridge and how much weight the bridge held. My students put all of the their information into Excel and create a spreadsheet that will help them calculate efficiency and do a comparison with all of the bridges in the class. As for gathering data, each bridge is put onto the structural tester, which is connected to a program running on the computer. The data being gathered is how much weight the bridge is holding every second until it breaks. Another nice feature with this program is the graph that is created for each break. My students use the graphs to determine which bridges held the most weight for the longest amount of time. As part of their grade, the student will create a report that either confirms or debunks their hypothesis.

I do not use Excel as extensively as a math or science teacher would, but my students are still getting exposure to that type of technology so that they can become comfortable with it.

As for the instructional strategy correlating with the learning theories, I feel that when the students are stating their hypotheses, you have the constructivism theory in play, and when they start gathering their data, inputting it into Excel and creating spreadsheets, and then you have the constructionism theory in play. Both being closely related and always being done at the same time.



Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory,instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Cognitivism in Practice

Dr Orey explains (2009), that the cognitive learning theories relate back to Information processing. As teachers, we are trying to get information into our students using different processes. The short term / working memory is limited to 7 pieces of information + or – 2 pieces at a time, so there is a limit to how much a learner can handle at one time. To place information into long-term memory requires elaboration, here we want our students to make, as many connections to that information as possible, doing so will put the information into long-term memory. An important theory in Informational processing is Paivio’s Dual Coding hypothesis. This theory is a “phenomena” where people can remember images much better than if it were in plain text. By putting the two together, you have more ways to make the connection to recall the information (Laureate, 2009). By using technology and the tools that it provides, like concept maps, advance organizers, and note taking strategies, teaches are able to help their students teach themselves how to retain information better.

“The instructional strategy, cues, questions, and advance organizers focuses on enhancing students’ ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (Pitler, et al, 2007). Cues are used to give the students an idea of what is about to learn, questions do the same thing as cues accept they help trigger prior knowledge that the students have. Concept mapping tools are great graphic organizers to support the dual coding hypothesis. For example, when students create a concept map, by using both graphics and text together, the student has a better chance pulling the information from their long-term memory. In a traditional woodworking class, I do not use a lot of technology, but based on what I have learned to date; I would like my students to take a Virtual Field trip to a Sawmill. During this field trip, I would like them to create a concept map around the given essential question. This information will then be used to create a brochure on what they learned about the process of how a tree becomes a piece of lumber that you buy at Home Depot or Lowes.

“The instructional strategy, summarizing and note taking, focuses on enhancing students’ ability to synthesize information and distill it into a concise new form” (Pitler, et al, 2007). Dual coding can be utilized in note taking when the student incorporates different formats and puts them together. By combining the different types of notes, the students have a higher percentage of recalling the information, because the information was viewed in multiple ways. To do this by hand would be time consuming, students creating double column notes by hand has not been looked upon with happy faces. If the students have a laptop at their disposal, creating notes that utilize dual coding would not take very long, and the notes would be there own.

As a woodworking teacher in a non technology classroom, I have found that using technology takes away from my students creating hands on projects. But before they can get to that stage of the class, they need to learn the very beginning. I feel that by introducing the above techniques when we explore a Virtual Field trip, my students will better appreciate the process of how our would came to be.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

EDUC-6711I-7 Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology

Assignment:
What are your thoughts on how the instructional strategies described in the resources you explored this week correlate with the principles of behaviorist learning theory.

Post:
In our reading this week our text talked about two different types of Instructional strategies; reinforcing effort, and homework and practice. As I look back at the rest of our resources, the behaviorist learning theory is best described by Lever-Duffy & McDonald as, “the learner acquires behaviors, skills, and knowledge in response to the rewards, punishments, or withheld responses associated with them” (2008). Correlating reinforcing effort with the behaviorist learning theory is quite simple. In the text, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that works, teachers create a type of Effort rubric so that each student can keep track of their own effort in different categories. At the end of the week, the students have a test, and then they compare their “effort” grade to their “test” grade. What they have found is that the more effort they put into their note taking, paying attention, participation, homework and so forth, the better they did on their test. So in a round about way, students are rewarding themselves for putting more effort into the work that is assigned. Sounds like behaviorism to me.

Homework and Practice relate back to skill and drill techniques which fall under behaviorist thinking. Homework is used for review and application of what the students have learned from the day. If done incorrectly, homework can seem like punishment, meaning, our students are doing homework for hours and hours every night. Is this good practice? No, this can work as a punishment, which is part of the behaviorist theory. Homework should be given not only as “busy” work, but as work that counts. Students need to see what they get right and wrong. You can not correct a behavior if you do not take the time to check it. If the student does that behavior long enough because it has not been checked, then when they get it wrong on a test, how are they to know they did it wrong. As stated in our online text, “Because it is easy for errors to slip in when students are practicing, teachers should give feedback as quickly as possible-ideally, early in the practice sessions, before students internalize erroneous processes and knowledge” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007, p.188).

Behaviorist learning is evident in both of the strategies; Reinforcing effort and homework and practice. When done correctly they can reward the necessary behavior and when done incorrectly, the result is negative. “The entire rational of behavior modification is that most behavior is learned. If behaviors can be learned, then they can also be unlearned or relearned” (Orey, 2001).


Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education,
Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1: Theoretical Foundations

Orey, M. (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.
Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Chapter 8: Reinforcing Effort
Chapter 10: Homework and Practice

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with
classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.