Technology-based Instructional Practices - Essay Example

The purpose of the in-depth section is to critically examine the theories supporting technology-based instructional practices aligned with the current educational system. Previous research studies suggest that technology, when used in an effective manner, can increase student achievement. However, the educational system must undergo systemic change in order to fully adopt and take advantage of constructivist centered technology-enhanced instructional practices. It is important that all stakeholders within the educational system understand the nature and complexity of social and cognitive constructivism and to act with this knowledge in mind when integrating technology-enhanced instruction. Because of the growing dependency and the importance of technology in society, technology has become increasingly important in schools as problem-solving instructional tools. The breadth portion of this Knowledge Area Module (KAM) presents a working theory of constructivism based upon instructional practices adapted to meet the technology requirements of the twenty-first century learner. There will be special emphasis on the work of Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, and Seymour Papert. The Breadth paper emphasized the relationship between social and cognitive constructivism along with influences in education. The constructivists’ theories and concepts addressed learning styles and academic achievement. It concluded with the suggestion that to increase productivity from student achievement and productivity, an increase in feedback communication from all stakeholders in an educational system. Feedback communication increases can be contributions to the use of technology-infused instruction, data management and intelligent classrooms communication. In the United States and other industrialized nations, computers have become a part of mainstream life. According to Henson (2005), the 2000 U.S. Census showed that 51% of households in the United States had computers; about 41.5% of American households had access to the Internet. Computers are positioned in schools across the nation. School districts cultivate reform practices to include the integration of technology in curriculum standards. Student technology standards are aligned with each grade level for students to master. Educational paradigm shifts bring new perspectives, new conceptualizations and new ways of thinking about a topic. The research studies explain the important role of technology within a constructivist centered classroom. In fact, the potential of new technologies has been generally unrealized by many educators (Mahn, 1999). Computers developed for the classroom, which were geared toward helping to teach the traditional curriculum and basic skills, were often operated as a means to deliver instruction, sometimes as a supplement to the teachers’ classroom instruction, and sometimes replacing classroom instruction altogether. Educators focused on basic skills and knowledge in the various content areas, used programmed instruction and drill and practice exercises, all based on behaviorism for its instructional approaches. According to Mahn (1999), technology helps mandate accountability toward increasing standards of achievement, and the shift in educational technology from theories of learning to cognitive theories. The computer was introduced into education in the 1960s and 1970s. Early use of computers in education settings stemmed from behaviorist perspectives of teaching based on Skinner’s theories (Gulati, 2008). First, computer programs operating in schools were called programmed instruction (PI) and did not have a long existence in the school curriculum. Skinner first developed a “teaching machine” in which children practiced basic math facts on a machine and received immediate feedback as to the correctness of their answers. Skinner was not satisfied with his initial teaching machine because it did not have step by step instructions for guiding students toward mastery of math facts. Programmed instruction developed in order to guide students through the steps of solving a problem, much like a tutor would guide a student. Skinner thought that programmed instruction was better because it provided students with guided math instruction at their learning level (Skinner, 1966; Mahn, 1999). The mid-1970s through the mid-1980s brought more affordable personal computers. Although most programs of this time reflected behavioral philosophies of learning and were more drill and practice in nature, constructivist theories of learning started to penetrate how software was designed and how computers were used with learners. Papert developed the programming language LOGO, which marked the introduction of constructivist theory and technology in education (Papert, 1991). The LOGO computer language enables learners to acquire skills and receive immediate feedback based on Piagetian constructivist perspectives of learning (Papert, 1991, p.8). School districts struggle with growing technology centered learner expectations to get students better access by means of eliminating time, place, and situational hurdles in ways that are cost efficient. Contemporary information technology mediated education is a choice that educational systems have started to look at as a way to eliminate these obstructions. In the past, unwillingness in school districts to approve or incorporate technologies primarily because of, mainly, a lack of research increasing academic achievement levels. However, the technology-based instructional practices through social and cognitive constructivism principles encourages the learner to explore, manipulate, experiment, question, and search out answers through collaboration. These instructional practices are considered cost effective and available to educational systems experiencing time and monetary obstacles (Young, 2006), even as sustaining the growth of higher order skills. Educational systems need to incorporate constructivist technology centered activities into their instructional curriculum. The educator’s philosophical orientation dictates the teaching and the use of technology in teaching (Brown & Lee 2006). Educators who articulate their use of technology practices increase learning opportunities for students. The educator identifies effective technology tools promoting social and cognitive practices. Instructors need to be cautious of technology tools not supporting grade level topics and student’s prior knowledge. The tools should promote higher level thinking skills. The educator stresses the significance of using an educational methods design model where the education goals are obviously recognized and affirmed, and exist separately from the student (Henson, 2005). The educator stresses the significance of using an educational methods design model where the education goals are obviously recognized and affirmed, and exist separately from the student (Page, 2005). Student behaviors centers on the expertise to learn and present under the finest environments for learning. The student appraised fairly with assessment tools that gauge the behaviors described in the stated objectives. The information from the assessment modifies the coaching so that it is useful with subsequent learners. After the systems, design procedures gives the confidence to allow educationalists to center on the requirements and aptitudes of the individual student ensuing in the progress of effective learning behavior (Santos, 2007). With the cognitive approach, emphasis is on the construction of individual knowledge and understanding.  Educationalists are concerned with the developmental stages of learning, and believes individuals are solely responsible for constructing the knowledge that he or she accumulates.  Students are ready to grasp, analyze and synthesize progressively more complex concepts as they build on previous experiences. Cognitive theorists suggest because “the learning experiences of every child vary from those of others, learners internalize and interpret information differently and in highly personal ways” (Oakhill & Bryant, 2004, p. 22). In the same way, Santos (2007) believes constructivist technology activities allow learners to take an active role in the learning process. Constructivist technology activities ensure that learners gain a full understanding of increasingly complex ideas without allowing them to miss important concepts along the way. Computer software programs allow the learner to master concepts through the repetition process that leads “towards mastery of skills and attributions of success” (Papert, 1991, p.5). Cognitive centered technology activities sustain the hierarchical learning theory, and the learner completes activities specific to gaps in understanding. Papert (1996) sustains mathematical technology software programs “present skills in graduated degrees of complexity to teach concepts like fractions and multiplication” (p. 36). Instructors resist technology in education because the technology tools “supports constructivist style learning feeling that, since computers avoid giving students direct contact with the objects of their learning cannot be viewed as being inherently constructivist in nature” (Page, 2005, p. 33). Cognitive constructivists look upon computers as tools for learning and integrating new knowledge; rather than teaching in the traditional way, teachers help students in their quest for answers. Social constructivists consider computers in education engaging students in learning activities through collaboration and exploration. The teacher identifies technology activities promoting discovery, and the teacher establishes numerous opportunities for students to acquire information through collaborative groups. Cognitive Constructivism Constructivism started with the insights of Socrates, who asserted that there are fundamental circumstances for learning that are in the cognition of the person. However, it was Piagets hypothesis of brain growth that had the major control on the growth of recent positions. In particular, Piaget initially highlighted the processes of intangible transforming as communications among existing cognitive arrangements and fresh awareness (Piaget, 1969; Wasdworth, 1978). The growth of the human brain proceeds in the course of adaptation and organization according to Jean Piaget (1896-1980). Adaptation is a practice of incorporation and adjustment; external events are absorbed into belief from one stand point and, on the other, fresh and strange mental constitution lodged into the mental setting. While Piaget recognizes awareness with action, he believes that psychological growth systematizes these methods in more multifaceted and incorporated ways to create the adult mind (Swan, 2005). Cognitive constructivism also upholds that there is a factual world that one seeks to appreciate. As soon as one constructs information, he is increasing satisfactory understandings of what the reality must be. Thus, constructing knowledge is a developing process through which truth can be understood. Even though this outlook centers on the person, it does not refute the significance of social relations. However, it cooperates with the situations; let it be physical or social situations. Furthermore, it is during social situations that cognitive interruptions usually take place. Such as during dialogue or exchange of thoughts with others one comes to know the discrepancies or meagerness of the understanding. However, in cognitive constructivism, the focal point continues on the individual progress of understanding, as if learning occurs in social settings (Lovett, 2007). The fundamental supposition in cognitive constructivism is that inner conflicts bring about the construction of knowledge, meaning that disagreement or confusion are essential urges for education (Tobias, 1991). The cognitive trouble ensuing from the conflict and confusion will decide the organization and nature of what is learned. Alike Piagets hypothesis, instructional techniques in this vision intend to tackle the learner with conditions that make the innate discrepancies in the learners naive replica simple and challenge the learners also to construct better models or at least to consider the virtues of other models offered by the teacher (Perkins, 2006, p. 19). According to this statement, teachers have to make available learning atmospheres that make the most of discrepancies involving the learners present knowledge and the fresh understandings they come across. Education environments are intended to confront understandings and the responsibility of the educationalist must be one of the catalysts. Accordingly, there are two essential instructional settings: educationalists know the learners naive model; and chances for genuine or replicated discourse in which discrepancies are exposed. While the focal point is on the learners accommodation of inconsistent thoughts, it is essential that the teacher acts as a catalyst, supplying learning opportunities that improve this procedure. Instructional techniques, for instance, case studies, discussions, individual and group debates, and team teaching using varied groupings are suitable instructional behavior that will initiate internal clashes, making easier the learners individual growth of understanding. Communication with peers who have dissimilar aptitude levels and conditions are a major basis of difference that can encourage this procedure (Gulati, 2008). In addition, cognitive hypothesis of learning promotes the expansion processes in working memory, the significance of prior information and approaches. Howell (2006) asserts technology tools strengthen the constructivist learning environment through situated cognition and genuine learning tasks, the application of latest technologies to create new learning opportunities. Constructivism helps build small learning societies and information building population jointly lead to constructivism as a central hypothesis of schooling in the nineties (Kanselaar, 2002). Lev Vygotsky is a famous Russian psychologist and philosopher from the 1930s, who emphasizes learning based upon cultural and social contexts. The author contends that culture will teach all learners both what to think and to how to think in and out of the classroom. He believed humans are the only group to have created culture; he saw it as having an important role in shaping cognitive processes. Vygotsky (1962) states, “culture teaches all learners what to think and how to think in and out of the classroom” (p. 18). One of the main subjects in the social and cultural constructivism is that education is an active process where learners construct novel thoughts or perceptions based on their present knowledge. Learners develop cognitive skills through culture and social interactions. The educator’s culture, values and background help foster the relationship between learners and instructional tasks in shaping cognitive development.  Social constructivism reminds that learning is fundamentally a social activity that is constructed during communication, joint activity, and relations with others. It emphasizes the responsibility of social communications in the sense of creation; particularly in maintaining knowledgeable society in knowledge construction. Social constructivism, furthermore, promotes to think the crucial role of language as the medium of thought; therefore, of knowing and learning, and the ways that knowledge and knowing are ethnically and historically resolute and realized (Glenberg, 2005). There is a significant part of Vygotsky’s work that is crucial upon Piaget’s works in the field. However, Vygotsky and Piaget contribute to some general ideas; yet there are major disagreements among them. On the subject of different stages of growth, Piaget believed that development leads to education, whereas Vygotsky assumed the opposite. The origin of constructivism goes back to the hypothesis of Piaget, Vygotsky and Dewey. However, the supremacy of constructivism on education begins from the early eighties. Constructivism turned out to be a retort in opposition to the objectivist epistemology of behaviorism and information processing assumption of learning. Behaviorism was substituted by the cognitive rebellion in psychology approximately in 1960. Papert contends the revolution in technology that has concurrently brought about the demand for enhancements in learning in addition to providing the opportunity to mend learning environments. The educational system must provide the latest technologies focusing on improving academic achievement. Learners refrain from the traditional lecture type approach, which is lost on most learners. This does not mean that simply adding a computer to the classroom is going to enable teachers to utilize the technology tool. The educational system should offer students and teachers tools, such as collaboration software, online courses, electronic literature and math programs accessed outside of school. Classrooms and technology tools provide the educator a real opportunity to mix constructivist approaches into the learning environment. However, according to Papert, this prediction for the potential of learning comes across one crucial hindrance, which are schools. Papert (1986) maintains that educational systems continues to be mostly loyal to the educational philosophy of the later part of nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and follows a lonely way of knowing everybody. The education system of tests, separation of age, teachers who construct submissive minds and stress on reading as the indispensable way to information are the most important characteristics of the education method today. Information conveyed directly from teacher to student are considered similar to money, being deposited in a bank for the future. Glenberg (2005) states, “educational systems follow favoritism and in fact obstruct learning by stressing proper knowledge and by following the epistemology of accuracy that force learners to be exactly correct regardless of ability levels” (p. 39). Papert believes education differentiates sharply with his portrayal of schools epistemology. The author suggests schools should support a more partial, qualitative, interrelated personal, tangible, insightful way of teaching. Constructionism was constructed on the theory that children will do their best by searching for themselves the precise information they require. The instructional practices assist the learner through ethically, expressively, materially, and academically in their efforts. Hence, the objective is to educate in a method with regard to create the most learning for the minimum teaching. Learners correspond with the constructivist approach to learning because students have the opportunity to interact with others through collaborative groups. Paperts approach to learning and his constructionist strategy depend on the computer for realization. The author assumes the computer, and mostly, its future growth, will alter learners association with knowledge, generating a revolution analogous to that of the introduction of printing and writing. Papert (1996) believes technology is the mammoth change needed to move from the present epistemology approach to the age of learning. Educators utilizing social and cognitive constructivism must understand their limitations. Instructors prepare to let go of some of the teaching authority more than they would in a traditional classroom. This hybrid model of instruction can take many forms. “The role of the instructor in a constructivist learning environment varies from time to time depending upon student needs and circumstances within each class.” (Boekaerts & Minnaert, p. 85). The learner controls the learning process more than they would in a traditional classroom. As explained earlier, constructivism is an epistemological hypothesis and not an idea of teaching. However, in education, the epistemological thinking creates powerfully pedagogical views. Specific conceptualizations of learning recommend subsequent strategies to teaching. Constructivism establishes meaning and meaning constructs directly in the brain of the persons, and not in teaching. For instance, constructivism proposes to regulate instruction, it is unlikely to regulate learning. The constructivist learning environment focuses on the learning environments, and little on the instructional planning. While such differences may seem just semantic, it may be particularly significant in online learning, since it insists on giving up the usual focus on the delivery of teaching and the intention of instructional resources, and in its place approaches course development in terms of making virtual spaces that promote and maintain active learning. In fact, constructivism recommends educators ought to be concerned with the intended meticulous kinds of learning environments, such as learning environments that are learner centered, knowledge-centered, assessment centered, and community-centered. The learner-centered environments that are recognized according to constructivist philosophy explains that individuals get exceptional knowledge, skills, attitudes, and ideas to the learning practice, and that there are various methods to arrange experience and several diverse perceptions that can be gathered from any occurrence or idea. Brown& Lee (2006) explains project and problem based learning accommodates different learning styles, makes content more meaningful, and students acquire higher level cognitive skills. The constructivist educator encourages teachers to utilize this instructional model is challenging. “In essence, the strategy is to define a territory and then to work with the learner in developing meaningful problems or tasks in that domain” (Papert, 1996, p. 41). Learner centered instruction therefore identifies the significance of structuring on the conceptual and educational information that learners carry with them to the learning practice, of connecting education to learners experiences, and of accommodating and surveying several outlooks and different understandings. Students take initiative, assume responsibility for their own learning and make choices about their learning. Educators refuse to accept the model because it is not as easy to assess. Learning often takes place in the form of group work, and the students learn from one another. Collaborative construction of knowledge often will allow the learners to gather information from their peers rather than regurgitating information in a lecture format. The students become the teachers, and the teacher becomes a director. The constructivist learning environment is a mix of traditional teaching and directing along with authentic problem focused learning. The teacher must become a coach who scaffolds the learning to new levels with new discoveries within the learning paradigm. “Rather than simplifying the environment for the learner, we seek to support the learner working in the complex environment.” (Savory, p. 5). Students require time to reflect on the information that is discovered through group work. This will highlight the learning, and it will authenticate the learning experiences. Read More