Learning to Build, Building to Learn

The Constructionist theory of learning states, "that people learn best when they build an external artifact or something they can share with others" (Laureate, 2009). I guess it is similar to the old saying, give a man a fish, he will eat today. Teach a man to fish, and he will never go hungry. If educators just give students information they will retain it only as long as they have too. But if students have to take that information and manipulate it, interpret it, even test it's accuracy in order to create something; that results in an enduring understanding of the information.

This week's resources offered many examples of ways that "students could use tools and technologies to create artifacts in order to resolve disequilibration" (Laureate, 2009). If, like Dr. Orey states, we are always trying to reach a balance between what we "think" is reality and what truly "is" reality, then by challenging our students to explore outside their schema we induce the need to either assimilate or accommodate new information so that it fits into their world (Laureate, 2009). The booklet project done by Lynda Donovan's sixth grade language arts class shows that when students were asked to reflect on the novels they read, the end product wasn't a few meaningless paragraphs. Ms Donovan pushed them out of the typical book report schema and inspired them to actively create an artifact representing their knowledge using Microsoft Publisher. Ms. Donovan stated that the project took a lot of"trial and error" in using the technology for the students to achieve their end product (Laureate, 2009). Using technology for a project such as this also exposes students to many 21st century skills such as, organization, communication, presentation, research skills, time management, and reflection (Orey, 2001). Not only did the technology allow them to learn about reading and writing in a different way, but it also taught them many other valuable skills.

Have you ever heard the phrase, everything I needed to know I learned in Kindergarten? Dr. Mitchel Resnik of M.I.T agrees with this idea. His blog on Edutopia, Kindergarten is the model for lifelong learning, is worth the read because I think it relates deeply to the ideas behind the constructionist theory and how project-based learning can continue beyond Kindergarten.

Speaking of Kindergarten, you may be very inspired by this video I also found on Edutopia, Beginning the Journey: Five-year-olds drive their own PBL projects. I just started serving Kindergarten in the art room this year and I have found them to be the most creative and amazing little beings. What I don't understand is what happens to those beautiful creative minds? They just seem to vanish, sometimes as quick as first grade. Is it because their instruction is based less on the Constructionist theory of learning? Is this where technology can play a role in older students classrooms? I hope so.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2009). Constructionist & Constructivist Learning theories. Baltimore, MD: Laureate Ed., Inc.

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Cognitive Correlations

My school district mandated the application of the cognitive learning theory in all classrooms and trained us in a program called Learning Focused Schools. One of the main components of a learning focused lesson plan is the graphic organizer. Call them what you want, concept maps, webs, advance organizers, they all serve one purpose, to organize information, help visualize ideas and connections between ideas. As an artist and as a visual learner, I appreciate the value of these cognitive tools. Much of my art curriculum is focused around understanding, interpreting, and communicating with visual images, so by using these tools in my instruction I am able to model that very idea. I find that they help me very much when planning a lesson and laying out an entire unit. Cognitive tools such as these help to organize knowledge and present information. They can help the learner to go beyond their own limitations, like for me, memory (Orey, 2001). I use the concept maps to help guide my lesson and make sure that I don't leave something out or forget an important point.

Matter of fact to help me with this blog entry I have formed a visual representation of the correlation between several instructional strategies and cognitive learning theories on Webspiration. Check it out. You tell me which you prefer, a few more paragraphs or the map?


Laureate Education, Inc. (2009). Cognitive learning theories. Baltimore, MD: Laureate Ed., Inc.

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Using Behaviorism in Instructional Technology

As I try to integrate more technology in my classroom, I see the value of correlating each element with leading learning theories. This week I explored many resources which support the principles of the behaviorist learning theory. Most all of these resources provided activities for students to either interact by answering questions or experience modeling through watching tutorials.


The resources I explored provided critical feedback (positive or negative reinforcement)in a timely manner. This type of instant feedback illustrates to students that they are learning something (Laureate, 2009). Using technology as programmed instruction, teachers can really target specific desired behaviors in individual students. "Behavior that goes unrewarded will be extinguished"(Orey, 2001). When teachers cannot supply the positive reinforcement, the reward, the instant feedback, in a timely manner, well designed instructional technology can do it for us. As technology gets more sophisticated, programs can go beyond just drill and practice and also link students to a variety of activities that meet their individual needs and differentiate instruction (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). Imagine how much more effective homework could be if it included targeted programs on the computer which provided the needed practice, but also provides the critical reinforcement which all students need but rarely get at home while doing homework. Homework could actually become a "fun thing".

My personal experience with instructional technology changing my behavior, mainly comes from tutorials. On-line tutorials,and multi-media presentations, model desired behaviors. Behaviorist theory defines this as observational learning (Orey, 2001). I have had much success in my classroom using this instructional strategy to teach origami. Students watch a video that demonstrates step by step how to fold a paper into a small intricate sculpture. They work at their desired pace and they learn by watching and doing it along with the video. They experience success, thus reward, much more often using this strategy in comparison with my students who attempt to learn it from book illustrations. I believe the modeling is key in this case. Having it on the computer allows me to divide my individual demonstration amongst several students simultaneously.

In having this success with tutorials, My behavior has been reinforced and I suspect that I will be including more of these demonstration videos on my Moodle site.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2009). Brain research and learning. Baltimore, MD: Laureate Ed., Inc.
Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.