The need for a bridge between basic learning research and
educational practice has long been recognized.
Ertmer and Newby, 1993

Goals:

• To reflect on your beliefs on how learning occurs, the role of the mind in that process, and how fundamental beliefs in the nature of reality (ontology) shape that process.
• To learn the three major schools of learning theory which influence the design of instruction.
• To reflect on how the choice or acceptance of a learning theory can directly shape the nature of the instructional experience being developed, particularly as it relates to the nature of the instructional strategies, the use of memory, and the transfer of learning.
  

As you will see in the assigned readings for this module the theories of learning which have the primary impact on instructional design are three: behaviourism; cognitive; and constructivism. All three have been used as the basis for designing instruction and all three have their advocates.

Of the three constructivism is the most recent and is, perhaps, garnering the most attention at the present time. As you read about constructivism please think about the differences in the nature of reality and the certainty which we can have about that reality which is implied in constructivist theory. This becomes an important point with regard to the extent to which blended constructivist and cognitivist approaches can be undertaken, which some authors are currently advocating.

Readings and Activities:

In this module you are asked to read the following two articles and to participate in the threads for this conference throughout the week:

Ertmer, P. A.., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behavorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6 (4), pp. 50-72.

Jonassen, D. (1993). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new instructional paradigm. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39 (3), pp. 5-14.