Siegfried M. Holzer,
Center for Technology and Communication,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA 24061
...for the computer to bring about a revolution in higher education, its introduction must be accompanied by improvements in our understanding of learning and teaching.
Herbert Simon, Nobel Laureate[1]
Many educators and technology experts believe i n the immense potential of computers as learning tools. "They offer an opportunity to deliver on a promise often made but too often broken; namely, that learning can be an intriguing journey through our world."[2] Moreover, "learning . . . is what virtually all adults will do for a living by the beginning of the 21st century."[3] To realize the potential of the computer for learning and teaching, however, we have to rethink what we teach, how we teach, and most of allhow we learn. In my search for guidelines in the development of multimedia learning environments, I found rich learning and teaching resources in diverse disciplines, from epistemology to engineering. I have become particularly impressed with Piaget,[4] the author of constructivism, who together with other great minds (such as Dewey and Lewin) laid the foundations of experience-based learning.[5] The objective of this article is to provide a brief tour from constructivism to active learning (see Figure 1).
The basic idea of constructivism[6] is that knowledge must be constructed by the learner; it cannot be supplied by the teacher. This is vividly expressed by the Farsi proverb
A well must produce its own water.
A clue to how learning can be nurtured is provided by Piaget's definitions of knowledge[6, p.19,64,110]
Thus, the construction of knowledge is a dynamic process that requires the active engagement of the learner.
The implications of constructivism relative to learning and teaching are as follows: We are all responsible for our own learning; the teacher is responsible for creating an effective learning environment.
In active learning, "knowledge [is] directly experienced, constructed, acted upon, tested, or revised by the learner."[7] The question is, how can we design a creative learning environment that promotes active learning? Figure 1 provides some guidelines.
According to Papert,[8] learning"building knowledge structures" happens especially felicitously when the learner is consciously engaged in meaningful activities that can be shared with others. DeCorts uggests that these activities should be representative of future tasks and problems, provide many opportunities for social interactions, and be rich in learning resources.[9,10]
Authentic activities form the core of many new learning environments that are concerned with active learning. Examples includes: experiential learning,[11,12] collaborative learning,[9,13] context-based learning,[14] and computer-based learning.[12,15,16]
We should seek and value students' views because they are windows to their knowledge, their reasoning.[17] Awareness of students' views gives us the opportunity to facilitate learning. "Learning is a journey, not a destination. Each point of view is a temporary intellectual stop along the path of ever-increasing knowledge."[17]
Students' views are accessible through open-ended questions and encouraged by nonjudgmental feedback. In contrast, narrow single-answer (right/wrong) questions tend to discourage risk taking and creativity of students.[17]
Authentic assessment, like learning, occurs most naturally and lastingly when it is in a meaningful context and when it relates to authentic concerns and problems faced by students.[17]
Meaningful tasks for context-based assessment are difficult to construct, but they provide many benefits:[17] Learning continues because solving complex problems requires the application and adaptation of knowledge to new situations; the teacher can discriminate between rote memorization and constructed knowledge; and multiple solutions are possible.
In order to promote active learning, we need an innovative curriculum that provides opportunities for students to inquire, explore, experiment, collaborate, and experience the joy of discovery. "Real inquiry is inherently interdisciplinary, and interdisc iplinary problems are inherently broad and open ended. Such problems rarely have one, easily accessible right answer."[17] The development of an innovative curriculum for engineering education is one of the principal missions of SUCCEED. [18]
New learning environments that are based on the principles of active learning are being developed in many institutions. They reflect a change in the culture of education[19,20] from teacher-centered to learner-centered education.
1.Kozma, R.B., and J. Johnston, "The Technological Revolution Comes to the Classroom," Change, 23(1), 10, January/February (1991)
2.O'Malley, C., "The Revolution Is Yet to Come," Personal Computing, 115, October (1989)
3.Perelman, L.J., "The New TechnologyThe End of Education," Washington Post Education Review, November 1 (1992)
4.Piaget, J., The Construction of Reality in the Child, Basic Books, New York, NY (1954)
5.Bennis, Warren, in Forward to Kolb, D., Experiential Learning, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1984)
6.Bringuier, J.C., Conversations with Jean Piaget, The University of Chicago Press (1980)
7.Thompson, J.G., and S. Jorgensen, "How Interactive is Instructional Technology? Alternative Models for Looking at Interactions between Learners and Media," Educational Technology, 24, February (1989)
8.Papert, S.A., and I. Harel, Eds, Constructionism, Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ (1991)
9.Beichner, R.J., "A Multimedia Editing Environment Promoting Science Learning in a Unique SettingA Case Study," Proc. of Ed-Media 93World Conf. on Educ. Multimedia and Hypermedia, Orlando, Florida, 60, June (1993)
10.DeCort, E., "Research on Learning and Instruction: European Contributions," paper given at seminar for the Graduate School of Education, State University of New York at Buffalo, NY (1991)
11.Kolb, D., Experiential Learning, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1984)
12.Laws, P., "Workshop Physics: Learning Introductory Physics by Doing It," Change, 20 July/August (1991)
13.Felder, R.M., K.D. Forrest, L. Baker-Ward, E.J. Dietz, and P.H. Mohr, "A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention: I. Success and Failure in the Introductory Course," J. of Eng. Ed., 82(1), 15 (1993)
14.Lumsdaine, E., and J. Voitle, "Contextual Problem Solving in Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics," AIChE Symp. Ser., 89, 540 (1993)
15.Redish, E.F., J.M. Wilson, and C. McDaniel, "The CUPLE Project: A Hyper- and Multimedia Approach to Restructuring Physics Education," CUPLE Workshop, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, August 3-6 (1992)
16.Shneiderman, B., "Education by Engagement and Construction: Experiences in the AT&T Teaching Theater," Proc. of Ed-Media 93World Conf. on Educ. Multimedia and Hypermedia, Orlando, Florida, 471, June (1993)
17.Brooks, J.G., and M.G. Brooks, The Case for Constructivist Classrooms, Ass'n. for Supervision and Curriculum Develop., Alexandria, Virginia (1993)
18.Anderson, T.J., "The Process of Engineering Education," The Innovator, The SUCCEED Newsletter, 1, 4, Winter (1994)
19.Tobias, S., They're Not Dumb, They're Different: Stalking the Second Tier, Research Corporation, A Foundation for the Advancement of Science (1990)
20.Wagener, U.E., "Changing the Culture of Teaching," Change, 29, July/August (1991)
