Constructivism

Table of Contents

Introduction
Paradigm Wars Part II: Constructivism vs Cognitivism
Constructivism as Situated Cognition
Theory in Action: Situated Cognition
Constructivism as Social Learning
Social Learning vs Situated Cognition
Theory in Action: Social Learning
Related Online Articles
Links
References

Introduction

With the emergence of the Post-Modern movement, some cognitive psychologists branched off (from the more positivistic and objectivist cognitivists) to form new schools of thought, including humanism, constructivism, social constructivism, and pragmatism among others. Generally speaking, these philosophies embrace the idea that knowledge is not an objective entity; rather, it is an idiosyncratic construction of knowledge that takes place within the individual or among individuals in a communittee of practice.

Paradigm Wars Part II: Constructivism vs Cognitivism

According to Orey and Nelson (1997), "knowledge cannot be known or understood independent of its context" and "learning occurs as a component of authentic activities that are common to the community of practice in which the learner is involved" (p.284). The emphasis of situated learning, therefore, is on stimulating legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice.

Cognitivists generally view learning as an internal, computational function of information processing interacting with knowledge structures (e.g., schema). This perspective is embodied in the instructional systems design (ISD) process, in which learning objectives are classified as cognitive, psychomotor, or attitude skills (Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992) and then, depending upon the level -- e.g., discrimmination, application, synthesis, and so on -- (see link to Bloom's Taxonomy) an instructional treatment is applied. For each type of skill, there is a pre-defined set of conditions and events that stimulates that kind of learning (see link to Gagne's Conditions of Learning). Outcomes are relatively predictable and reproduceable.

Situated cognition is radically different from the cognitivist view. In the former, knowledge is seen as unique (contextual) rather than generic (empirical) and learning is more often socially, physically, and culturally mediated than constructed internally in a vacuum. Situated cognition emphasizes meshing new knowledge with existing schema, whereas the latter focuses on transferring new schema that are isolated from pre-existing ones. Knowledge is seen as "a relation between an individual and a social or physical situation. (Orey & Nelson, 1997: p.287)" rather than something internal to an individual person. Lave and Wenger (1991) suggest that situated learning involves social interaction and negotiation in communities of practice that leads to a dynamic, reciprocating relationship between understanding and experience.

As a point of reference, consider an apprenticeship an example of situated learning, where the apprentice learns from a master all of the ins and the outs of a particular trade through hands-on experience and situational interactions. In technology mediated environments, goal-based scenarios (Shank & Jona, 1991) and cognitive flexibility hypertext (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson & Coulson, 1991) are examples of situated learning strategies, where the student interacts with a wide variety of often messy, situational factors.

Constructivism as Situated Cognition

Situated cognition basically suggests that all meaningful learning takes place in relation to real-life contexts (situations). Therefore, instruction should be hands-on, contextual, and problem-based.

Situated cognition is a learning theory that is subsumed under the constructivist philosophical umbrella. Bruner (1966) is sometimes credited with first setting out the primary tenet of constructivism: the learner constructs his/her own meaning of experiences as he/she interacts with the world. Rogers (1969) later emphasized the importance of experiential learning. However, it was not until much later that Bruner and others began to integrate culture and ideas of socially constructed knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978). Bruner's (1986) situated cognition theory essentially states that knowledge is contextually bound to a set of experiences (a case, situation, or scenario). This implies that knowledge is localized and temporary, not an objective reality imposed globally, externally…as Skinner (1954) and other objectivists in both the behaviorist and cognitivist camps argued. Rather, knowledge is created by those individuals working within a field of practice… it is tentative, context-dependent, and detail-oriented, while objectivists argue that knowledge can exist independently of individuals, can be abstractly applied to multiple situations (if not all), and is empirical (stripped of context).

Situated cognition is a learning theory because it describes what learning is (knowledge construction by the individual) and how learning takes place (through contextually bound interactions between the individual's experience and existing constructs).

Situated cognition has been widely applied in instructional design settings: problem-based learning (Barrows, 1980s), cognitive apprenticeships (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989), learning communities (Bielaczik & Collins, 1995), cognitive flexibility hypertext (Spiro, Feltovich, & Coulson, 1992), and goal-based scenarios (Schank, 1995). Building on his work with context-dependency theory (1975) and script theory (1977), Schank (1995) offers an instructional design approach in which the learner is placed in a real-life situation (e.g., diagnosing a patient) and given control over a number of performance variables (e.g., the types of tests a doctor might run to help diagnose the patient), and asked to accomplish a goal (e.g., correctly diagnose the patient in time to treat it). In these goal-based scenarios, the individual learns from interacting with contextually relevant stimuli and learns from his/her mistakes (e.g., running the wrong kind of test, mis-diagnosing, taking too long, etc.) and experiences the consequences of those mistakes. Their learning is contextually bound, experiential, and temporary. High-level thinking skills, especially problem-solving, are developed as is the ability to transfer those skills to different contexts (scenarios).

Theory in Action: Situated Cognition

In my practice of instructional design, these theories have had a significant impact. They have helped turn passive learning experiences -- where content was static and rigid -- into vibrant knowledge building sessions where content became organic (i.e., alive with nuances and variations as well as maleable and generative).

Training of ill-structured content
In 1998, I developed an integrated customer service/performance management training module (for use in a F2F classroom setting) using a combination of Spiro's Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext approach, Shank's Goal-based Scenario, and Social Learning Theory. Until then, customer service training consisted of a lecture dealing with the company's 10 service objectives, a handout, and a post-test to measure retention and comprehension. the performance management modules (which included performance appraisals) were delivered in the same manner.

The new integrated module consisted of three customer service scenarios (cases) that were written from several points of view (perspectives), including customers amd employees, and touching upon different customer service issues (themes). The cases, perspectives, and themes were interwoven using the CFH approach. Each learner was given the following goal: 'as the Manager of this retail unit, write a performance appraisal and conduct a performance review for the fictional employees in these scenarios.' This contextually meaningful goal was a product of Shank's influence on the design.

The learners went through the CFH portion of the module individually using a PC or, if preferred, using a paper-based version. In preparation for this, learners had to learn how to complete the performance evalauation on their own and how to conduct the performance evaluation (two sets of skills that were also part of the broader management training program). This they did in groups or individually, depending on their preference. After going through one of the cases, the learners were asked to conduct the performance appraisal meetings with their virtual staff members - by way of a role play exercise. There, they began to see just how fuzzy performance appraisals can be. Each management trainee came up with different sets of strengths and areas for improvement even though each had read the same case. The dissonance this caused led to in-depth discussions among the learners about what constitutes performance in the area of customer service and what steps they could, as managers, take to improve it. As the final part of the module, the class (between 2 and 6 people) was asked to develop a customer service contract that each member would agree to sign and later have his/her staff sign as well. The only condition was that it needed to be something that their district managers would sign also. This involved a great deal of discussion, negotiation, and group meaning making.

Although this approached increased the overall time it took to train these managers in these specific areas (almost doubled it) and managers performed lower than average on the post-tests, significant differences in customer satisfaction were ultimately seen in the stores where those managers went, and as a result, this pilot program was approved for permanent use.

Constructivism as Social Learning

Vygotsky (1978) advanced the notion that learning is mediated by language embedded in social discourse. Humans are unique in the animal kingdom for our complex use of language in forming practical and abstract intelligence. Therefore, social learning theorists subscribe to a framework that is highly based upon cooperative learning and social negotiation. Social learning emphasizes conversations and the need for active discussion (dialog) among learners, practitioners, experts, instructors, and other peripheral participants.

Laurillard (1993) emphasized social learning as "an iterative process, involving discursive, adaptive, interactive, and reflexive qualities, the main focus being on teacher-student relationship (described by McMahon, 1997). On the other hand, social constructivists like Jonassen (1994), stress the importance of collaboration among learners in constructing (and negotiating) group meaning.

Whereas Piaget (1977) describes learning in terms of a natural, physiological maturation process, Vygotsky suggests that when learning with peers (in particular, with more capable peers), the learner can extend ahead of the limitations of her physiological maturity. This concept is known as the 'Zone of Proximal Development' and adds support for social learning strategies such as cognitive apprenticeships, communities of learners, and communities of practice. Note that these strategies incorporate notions of authenticity and context, creating an overlap with situated cognition.

Social Learning vs Situated Cognition

Situated cognition and social learning are closely related constructivist concepts that both emphasize the need for interactive learning processes (versus passive or vicarious learning) as well as the development of high-level cognitive skills and deeper meaning. While they differ in their approaches, fundamentally both view learning as a natural, social process that is embedded in culture, context, and the way we live.

Nevertheless, situated cognition and social learning do have differences. Whereas situated cognition proponents stress that learning is naturally fueled by contextual needs (or problems), social learning theorists suggests that learning by its very nature occurs in relation to social environments. Therefore, while the former stresses the need for real-life contexts and problem-centered instructional strategies, the latter strives to make those happen within collaborative learning environments.

In Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson (1999: p.165), the authors developed a semantic network to describe their own understanding of how the two concepts are related, suggesting that social constructivism is based on situated learning.

Theory in Action: Social Learning

Collaborating to develop tools
In 2000, I co-taught a course, Designing Web-based Instruction, in which we utilized a collaborative approach to develop an assessment tool for interactivity. We split the class into groups of 4 or 5 students, then each group developed a tool. It could be in the form of a rubric, a checklist, or anything else that one might use to assess the interactivity level of a piece of web-based instruction. In order to do this, students had to figure out just what they meant by interactivity. Agreeing on this was no easy feat, requiring negotiation and cooperation. Once they agreed on a working definition, they set out to define categories and specific criteria as well as a scale of measure.

Once all of the groups were finished, each group presented their assessment tool to the class. This led to another round of discussion about the meaning of interactivity as well as the categories, criteria, and scales used. The six or seven assessment tools were slowly synthesized into one. In the end, the class had a tool that everyone could later use to evaluate sample courses as well as their own WBIs. In the future, when I have further opportunities to use this approach, I plan to add another round of discussions later in the semester to revisit the topic, once everyone has had a chance to use the tool for some time. This, in a sense, incorporates a situated cognition element by leveraging the lessons learned while using the tool in a real-life context. Another approach, would be to sustain the discussion throughout the semester by way of an asynchronous online forum (bulletin board) and invite external comments (e.g., from practitioners from the field).