Choose one of the ID
articles posted by a peer and read it. Write a blog reflection about what you
learned from your three readings and note items, theories, and elements that
you would like to know more about and whether it impacts your design or tells
you more about how you learn.
Week 1
Savery and Duffy’s article provides a basic overview of the constructivist learning theory and then discusses how it relates to instructional design (1995). Constructivism has three major aspects: Understanding comes from a person’s interaction with their environment. Learning occurs when one’s prior understanding conflicts with a new “stimulus.” Knowledge evolves through social interactions when different viewpoints challenge the ones we already have (Savery & Duffy, 1995).
The approach Savery and Duffy suggest, that works well with the constructivist is called problem-based learning (1995). Learners should be given ownership of the overall problem/task and solutions. Tasks should be authentic that reflect the complexity of the real world. Learning environments that challenge learner’s thinking and should encourage the testing of ideas against alternative views. Finally, students should be given time to reflect on their learning experience.
Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright elaborate on the constructivist framework, more specifically on how it relates to online science classrooms (2020). The article proposes a scaffolding model that works well for online science instruction, “predict, observe, explain, and evaluate (POEE)” (Mamun, Lawrie, & Wright, 2020). In this model, students must generate questions on their own through prediction and observation encouraging higher order thinking and self-regulation. As a former science educator, I found that the article hit close to home. It was easy to tell students about a scientific phenomenon, rather than make them discover the answer for themselves.
Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright’s article are directly applicable to the project I make for this class because I intend to make a science-based lesson. While the article does a good job of laying out the theory, I would like to look for simulations that can be placed on my project. Evaluating student learning is also difficult in a constructivist learning environment, and it will be good to do more research in that direction.
While my project is going to be online, I will likely design my course to allow me to use a blended approach. Sharma’s article on blended learning gives multiple explanations of what blended learning is (2010). A traditional definition of blended learning states that blended learning is “a combination of face-to-face and online teaching” (Sharma, 2010). However, an expanded definition states that a course is blended if it uses a combination of technologies or methodologies. While this expansive definition could, in theory, cover almost all lessons, thinking with a blended learning mindset can help “identify the optimum mix of course delivery to provide the most effective language learning experience” (Sharma, 2010). I look forward to learning some of these different technologies and methodologies in this class.
The approach Savery and Duffy suggest, that works well with the constructivist is called problem-based learning (1995). Learners should be given ownership of the overall problem/task and solutions. Tasks should be authentic that reflect the complexity of the real world. Learning environments that challenge learner’s thinking and should encourage the testing of ideas against alternative views. Finally, students should be given time to reflect on their learning experience.
Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright elaborate on the constructivist framework, more specifically on how it relates to online science classrooms (2020). The article proposes a scaffolding model that works well for online science instruction, “predict, observe, explain, and evaluate (POEE)” (Mamun, Lawrie, & Wright, 2020). In this model, students must generate questions on their own through prediction and observation encouraging higher order thinking and self-regulation. As a former science educator, I found that the article hit close to home. It was easy to tell students about a scientific phenomenon, rather than make them discover the answer for themselves.
Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright’s article are directly applicable to the project I make for this class because I intend to make a science-based lesson. While the article does a good job of laying out the theory, I would like to look for simulations that can be placed on my project. Evaluating student learning is also difficult in a constructivist learning environment, and it will be good to do more research in that direction.
While my project is going to be online, I will likely design my course to allow me to use a blended approach. Sharma’s article on blended learning gives multiple explanations of what blended learning is (2010). A traditional definition of blended learning states that blended learning is “a combination of face-to-face and online teaching” (Sharma, 2010). However, an expanded definition states that a course is blended if it uses a combination of technologies or methodologies. While this expansive definition could, in theory, cover almost all lessons, thinking with a blended learning mindset can help “identify the optimum mix of course delivery to provide the most effective language learning experience” (Sharma, 2010). I look forward to learning some of these different technologies and methodologies in this class.
Mamun, M. A. A.,
Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2020). Instructional design of scaffolded online
learning modules for self-directed and inquiry-based learning environments. Computers & Education, 144, 103695.
doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103695
Savery, J., &
Duffy, M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model
and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology,
35, 31-38.
Sharma, P.
(2010). Blended learning . ELT Journal, 64(4), 456–458. Retrieved from
https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/10.1093/elt/ccq043
Comments
Post a Comment