Using Activity Theory to Design Constructivist Online Learning Environments for Higher Order Thinking: A Retrospective Analysis
http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol29.3/cjlt29-3_art2.html
by Dirk Morrison
Associate Professor with the Extension Division, University of Saskatchewan.
Dirk.Morrison@usask.ca.
using constructivist instructional design requires 3 items:
1. an understanding of the central theoretical tenets and principles of constructivism,
2. an awareness of the extent to which these resonate with one's own values and assumptions about teaching and learning, and
3. some clear ideas and strategies regarding how one translates these into practice.
importance of best practices
contructivist's perspective is that knowledge is created by the individual as a result of interacting with his/her environment. important to be able to analyze specific tools and tasks chosen to evaluate appropriateness.
paper looks at a particular learning project using the frameworks of computer-supported learning environment (CSLE) and activity theory to assess for successful constructivist environment.
notion that computer conferencing is effective means with which provide learners with collaborative constructivist approach (Garrison 1997).
Sherry (2001) all computer mediated communication is socio-technical: can't divorce the two.
Collaborative Issues Analysis Project (IAP) - use of ALN to establish constructivist learning environment. Project also designed to foster higher order learning skills. It's success judged against f nine principles of computer-supported collaborative learning environments (Means et al., 1993).
Project was a combo of f2f and async communication using First Class. the 28 member class was broken into small working teams (3-5 members) to focus their activities on the analysis of a particular issue (authentic task) relevant to agriculture leadership. this is the part that is referred as Issues Analysis Project or IAP.
conceptual framework of IAP followed Ruggerio's (1988) issues analysis model of five basic process stages:
1. participants explored options and issues,
2. expressed a chosen issue precisely,
3. investigated sources of information, - use of 3 sources:themselves, people around them, authorities (experts)
4. produced ideas about the issues,
5. evaluated and refined ideas into a final written report and oral presentation.
sample questions/prompts for the different stages:
Exploration - Why is this issue as it is and not as it should be?
Expression - What is the essence of the issue?
Investigation - How have you extended your information sources?
Idea production - What techniques will you use to generate good ideas?
Evaluation/refinement - What are your central ideas, your fundamental stance?
Eveb though it seems that a project like this would be a successful constructivist activity, how does one know? Need specific indicators of success.
computer-supported collaborative learning based on situated learning Sherry (2000). Lave & Wenger (1991) and situated learning context = the linking of students with a community of practitioners.
Markers of an Authentic Task (Means, et al. 1993) compared to The Issues Analysis Project?
multidisciplinary curriculum =
required participants to consult a wide variety of information sources, across a variety of disciplines.
collaborative learning =
emphasized a collaborative, team effort within all phases and products
heterogeneous groupings =
required that each IAP group was heterogeneous (i.e., members from different provinces, agri-food sectors, education levels, etc.)
interactive modes of instruction =
used the CC component, in conjunction with face-to-face meetings, to create a system which facilitated interactivity
student exploration =
emphasized exploration of the issue explicitly (as one of the stages) and implicitly as a general attitude to the project
teacher as facilitator =
successfully encouraged the use of peer facilitation to complete the project; some facilitation by the CALL Program Coordinator
performance-based assessment =
required a final product, namely, a formal report, representing the group's collaborative efforts of the analysis of their issue
extended blocks of time =
took place over an 18 month period (the duration of the CALL Program)
all students practice advanced skills =
facilitated the use and development of a variety of skills, including the use of CMC tools to conduct collaborative group work online
LOOKING AT THE IAP AS ACTIVITY SYSTEM REFLECTING ACTIVITY CENTERED DESIGN
activity system usually has 6 steps:
1. clarify purpose of activiy
2. analyze activity system - define subject/s (or actors), relevant community/
communities, and object.
3. analyze activity structure - break activity into component parts.
4. analyze mediators like tools, rules, roles - First Class was tool, rule of expected participation
5. analyze contextual bounds of subject and community - IAP team established context depending on who was in the group
6. analyze activity system dynamics - looking at how dynamics change over time and the interrelationship of the five elements.
author feels that can't analyze design elements separately, but rather as attempt to stimulate holistic thinking: (content-basic, critical, creative, and complex thinking)
looking at changes in each individual without considering context like the IAP is not complete. need to consider context, "an integral aspect of cognitive activities and events, not a nuisance variable" (Rogoff & Lave, 1984, p. 1).
Context here includes the physical and conceptual structure of the learning environment, the purpose of the activity, and the social milieu in which it is embedded.
also invitational environment = learners feel comfortable expressing their ideas, do not fear being wrong, willing to challenge established points of view, and risk asking, "What if?" and "Why not?" (Barell, 1991, p. xiii-xiv). this requires: 1) the creation of online activities reflecting basic principles of computer-supported collaborative learning, and 2) that an activity-centred design process be followed.
posted by Elaine at
3:38 PM
