Constructivism
IST:524. Term 1A
Week 3 Objectives
By the end of this topic you will be able to:
- Describe constructionist perspectives
- Compare across the three major learning theory perspectives
- Differentiate instructional design theories from learning theories
List of Content
- The constructionist perspectives
- Discussion forum: The benefits of Human Performance Technology (HPT) from the international Newspaper Industry
- Response to classmate post. "4 Key Myths of Human Performance Technology: How to protect your organization"
- Constructivism "its benefits, its costs, and what we should be doing" Mini Report #3
- Response from Dr. Bude Su
1. Constructivism Perspectives
Search returns from this website
- Constructivism IST:524 Week 3 (this web page)
https://www.danapayne.net/constructivism.html - Behaviorism and Constructivism IST:524 Week 2
https://www.danapayne.net/behaviorism--cognitivism.html - Learning Theory IST:520 Week 1
https://www.danapayne.net/learning-theory.html - Dr. Robert M. Gagné IST:520 Week 2
https://www.danapayne.net/robert-gagneacute---information.html - Dr. Robert B. Kozma teaching and learning IST:524 Week 7
https://www.danapayne.net/current-issues-new-directions.html - Social Constructivism - Metacognition IST:520 Week 4
https://www.danapayne.net/social-constructivism-metacognition.html - No. 4. Read the paper titled, Constructivism "its benefits, its costs, and what we should be doing."
Available on this web-page and may be downloaded.
2. Discussion Forum: Benefits of Human Performance Technology (HPT) from the Newspaper Industry
3. Response to Classmate's post
"The 4 Key Myths of Human Performance Technology: How to protect your organization"
Addressed to Classmate,
The counterintuitive nature of the Human Performance Technology myths you described in your article (regarding technology, job satisfaction, immediate feedback and subject matter experts) was compelling. In each case, the logical assumption is that if some is good, more is better. After reading your article on how to successfully scale “Myth Mountain,” this is clearly not the case.
Comments on your graphic and article layout:
I don’t know how to improve upon your graphic. It is hard to imagine a more effective use of a crisp, colorful graphic that metaphorically and literally illustrates your article’s overarching premise.
Comments on the four major areas of your article:
Technology: Additions and upgrades must achieve “worthy” performance - defined as valued accomplishment derived from costly behavior - whose cost is considerably lower than the value of the accomplishment. One aspect of cost not directly mentioned in your article is the potential (initial) performance cost related to the learning curve for the organization in adapting to operations, maintenance and support of new technologies.
Job Satisfaction: Your recommendations for improving worker performance could be expanded to include non-instructional interventions (such as enhanced motivation, better equipment, more supportive organizational structures) targeted at concurrently enhancing job satisfaction.
Immediate Feedback: Your recommendations regarding immediate feedback could be expanded to emphasize the importance of the content (i.e. the qualitative and constructive nature) of feedback, in addition to determining when and how feedback will best be received.
Subject Matter Experts: Your premise regarding the potential pitfalls of relying upon Subject Matter Experts (SME) in defining performance steps are well-developed. I am; however, “left hanging” in want of a solution for overcoming the noted limitations of the “unconscious competence” of SME.
Finally, your introduction and conclusion sections are well-balanced and, like the entirety of your article, exceptionally well written.
Dana
Addressed to Classmate,
The counterintuitive nature of the Human Performance Technology myths you described in your article (regarding technology, job satisfaction, immediate feedback and subject matter experts) was compelling. In each case, the logical assumption is that if some is good, more is better. After reading your article on how to successfully scale “Myth Mountain,” this is clearly not the case.
Comments on your graphic and article layout:
I don’t know how to improve upon your graphic. It is hard to imagine a more effective use of a crisp, colorful graphic that metaphorically and literally illustrates your article’s overarching premise.
Comments on the four major areas of your article:
Technology: Additions and upgrades must achieve “worthy” performance - defined as valued accomplishment derived from costly behavior - whose cost is considerably lower than the value of the accomplishment. One aspect of cost not directly mentioned in your article is the potential (initial) performance cost related to the learning curve for the organization in adapting to operations, maintenance and support of new technologies.
Job Satisfaction: Your recommendations for improving worker performance could be expanded to include non-instructional interventions (such as enhanced motivation, better equipment, more supportive organizational structures) targeted at concurrently enhancing job satisfaction.
Immediate Feedback: Your recommendations regarding immediate feedback could be expanded to emphasize the importance of the content (i.e. the qualitative and constructive nature) of feedback, in addition to determining when and how feedback will best be received.
Subject Matter Experts: Your premise regarding the potential pitfalls of relying upon Subject Matter Experts (SME) in defining performance steps are well-developed. I am; however, “left hanging” in want of a solution for overcoming the noted limitations of the “unconscious competence” of SME.
Finally, your introduction and conclusion sections are well-balanced and, like the entirety of your article, exceptionally well written.
Dana
4. Constructivism Paper
Constructivism "its benefits, its costs, and what we should be doing"
Authors K. Cunningham, R. Mahmoud, D. Payne, and L. White. Mini Report #2
Authors K. Cunningham, R. Mahmoud, D. Payne, and L. White. Mini Report #2
| mini_report2.pdf |
| mini_report2_feedback_bellaluna.pdf |