jsanguino

Original Source Material

Student Version

The philosophical position known as constructivism views knowledge as a human construction. The various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. Instead, human knowledge, whether the bodies of content in public disciplines (such as mathematics or sociology) or knowledge of the individual learner; is a human construction.

References:
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Constructivist philosophers assert that knowledge is made by humans themselves. Knowledge is not "out there" in some external reality separate from us. It is we humans who create the content in disciplines such as math and biology. That knowledge would not exist without people making it.

References:
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Original Source Material

Student Version

Memory is given a prominent role in the learning process. Learning results when information is stored in memory in an organized, meaningful manner. Teachers/designers are responsible for assisting learners in organizing that information in some optimal way.Designers use techniques such as advance organizers, analogies, hierarchical relationships, and matrices to help learners relate new information to prior knowledge. Forgetting is the inability to retrieve information from memory because of interference, memory loss, or missing or inadequate cues needed to access information.

References:
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.

Memory takes an important role in the process of learning. Learning occurs when information is integrated into student memory in a structured and meaningful way. Teachers can help students learn by arranging that information in useful ways. Advance organizers could be used to assist learners to connect existing knowledge to new knowledge.

References:
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.

Original Source Material

Student Version

In a complex task such as creating a website for learning, instructors may want to support the generation of multiple solutions in learners' peer feedback. Anonymity may create a social context where learners feel freer to express varied ideas, and make the task of giving feedback less inhibited. However, teachers need to know just how anonymity impacts the learning dynamic in order to make informed choices about when anonymous configurations are appropriate in peer feedback.

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers' comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

According to Howard, Barrett, and Frick (2010), in order to make appropriate choices educators must understand the ways in which hiding or showing the identity of participants can impact the interaction that takes place in peer feedback activities. Obscuring the identity of participants in peer feedback "may create a social context where learners feel freer to express varied ideas, and make the task of giving feedback less inhibited" (p. 90).

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers' comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

Original Source Material

Student Version

While solitary negative reactions or unjustified suggestions for change have the potential to dissipate discourse rather than build it, the pattern analysis shows that the anonymous condition seemed to provide a safe explorative space for learners to try out more reasons for their multiple solutions. Teachers will rarely give anonymous feedback, but the experience of giving anonymous feedback may open a social space where learners can try out the reasons for their suggestions.

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers' comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

Teachers don't often provide feedback anonymously, but the ability to provide feedback anonymously may create a context where the rationale associated with specific suggestions can be more safely explored (Howard, Barrett, & Frick, 2010). However, we cannot assume that all anonymous online spaces will serve as safe social spaces.

Original Source Material

Student Version

Learning is a complex set of processes that may vary according to the developmental level of the learner, the nature of the task, and the context in which the learning is to occur. As already indicated, no one theory can capture all the variables involved in learning.

References:
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

A learning theory, there, comprises a set of constructs linking observed changes in performance with what is thought to bring about those changes.

References:
Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

A learning theory is made up of "a set of constructs linking observed changes in performance with whatever is thought to bring about those changes" (Driscoll, 2000). Therefore, since "learning is a complex set of processes that may vary according to the developmental level of the learner, the nature of the task, and the context in which the learning is to occur, it is apparent that no one theory can capture all the variables involved in learning" (Gredler, 2001).

Original Source Material

Student Version

The theory we have constructed originates with the three phases of learning described above. We have organize and adapted the features of simulations to provide the learner with the most effective and efficient presentations in order to achieve successful acquisition, application and assessment. Our general model describes five aspects of simulations and provides prescriptions for the implementation of each. It applies to all simulations for teaching principles or procedures. Specific conditions or types of simulations require their own characteristic prescriptions that are described G3 variations on the general model.

References:

Reigeluth, C., & Schwartz, E. (1989). An instructional theory for the design of computer-based simulations. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 16(1), 1-10.

Another ID theory that could be useful in the design of educational games is a model presented by Reigeluth and Schwartz (1989) intended for designing instruction in educational simulations. This model provides a more specific approach to designing instruction. Reigeluth and Schwartz propose three phases of the learning process which educational simulations should activate. They are: (1) acquisition of basic knowledge, (2) application of knowledge to the full range of scenarios, and (3) assessment of what has been learned. Their model for designing educational simulations is comprised of heuristics intended to inform the designer in following a set of prescriptions.

References:

Original Source Material

Student Version

There is a desperate need for theorists and researchers to generate and refine a new breed of learning-focused instructional design theories that help educators and trainers to meet those needs, (i.e., that focus on learning and that foster development of initiative, teamwork, thinking skills, and diversity). The health of instructional-design theory also depends on its ability to involve stakeholders in the design process.

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

We "need theorists and researchers to generate and refine learning-focused instructional design theories...." Such theories will "help educators and trainers to meet those needs ... that focus on learning and that foster development of initiative, teamwork, thinking skills, and diversity."

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Original Source Material

Student Version

To summarize, the elaboration model of instruction starts by presenting knowledge at a very general or simplified level in the form of a special kind of overview. Then it proceeds to add detail or complexity in "layers" across the entire breadth of the content of the course (or curriculum), one layer at a time, until the desired level of detail or complexity is reached.

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-453). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

They soon switched to a model based on the elaboration theory (Reigeluth, 1999). Using this approach, the game would begin with a level that offered the simplest version of the whole task (the epitome); subsequent levels would become increasingly more complex--an approach common to videogames--with opportunities for review and synthesis.

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-453). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Original Source Material

Student Version

Major changes within organizations are usually initiated by those who are in power. Such decision-makers sponsor the change and then appoint someone else - perhaps the director of training - to be responsible for implementing and managing change. Whether the appointed change agent is in training development or not, there is often the implicit assumption that training will "solve the problem." And, indeed, training may solve part of the problem.... The result is that potentially effective innovations suffer misuse, or even no use, in the hands of uncommitted users.

References:
Dormant, D. (1986). The ABCDs of managing change. In Introduction to Performance Technology (p. 238-256). Washington, D.C.: National Society of Performance and Instruction.

When major changes are initiated in organizations, there is often the implicit assumption that training will 'solve the problem.' And, indeed, training may solve part of the problem (Dormant, 1986, p. 238).

References:
Dormant, D. (1986). The ABCDs of managing change. In Introduction to Performance Technology (p. 238-256). Washington, D.C.: National Society of Performance and Instruction.

Original Source Material

Student Version

Other major issues involve the accepted methods by which fidelity is measured. There are two major methods described in the literature for fidelity measurement. The first is through mathematical measurement that calculates the number of identical elements shared between the real world and the simulation; the greater the number of shared identical elements, the higher the simulation fidelity. A second method to measure fidelity is through a trainees' performance matrix.

References:
Liu, D., Blickensderfer, E. L., Macchiarella, N. D., & Vincenzi, D. A. (2009). Simulation fidelity. In D. A. Vincenzi, J. A. Wise, M. Mouloua & P. A. Hancock (Eds.), Humanfactors in simulation and training (pp. 61-73). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Liu et al. (2009) identified two major methods for measuring fidelity. The first is a mathematical (objective) method that requires counting "the number of identical elements shared between the real world and the simulation; the greater the number of shared identical elements, the higher the simulation fidelity" (p. 62). The second method involves a performance matrix that compares a human's performance in the simulation with that person's real-world performance, producing an indirect measure of fidelity.

References:
Liu, D., Blickensderfer, E. L., Macchiarella, N. D., & Vincenzi, D. A. (2009). Simulation fidelity. In D. A. Vincenzi, J. A. Wise, M. Mouloua & P. A. Hancock (Eds.), Humanfactors in simulation and training (pp. 61-73). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.