CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 1

Constructivist Approach to Technology Integration

EDTech 504
Christa Brediger
Boise State University









CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 2

Abstract
This paper will be exploring and analyzing the impact of the constructivist
approach, when partnered with technology integration, on todays elementary students.
Constructivism and technology integration appear to go hand in hand. Throughout the
following sections specific examples are used to demonstrate how technology is
strategically used within classroom instruction to create a student-centered learning
environment. Each example is connected back to the constructivist framework. The
paper will provide an overview and breakdown of the constructivist learning theory and
how it affects the development of technologys emerging role with in the classroom.
The resources explored, shared, and cited throughout this paper focus on the dynamic
learning environment that is established when technology is integrated through the
constructivist approach.









CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 3
Introduction
According to Merriam-Websters online dictionary, a teachers role is to guide
the studies of. Think about different names meaning teacher: instructor, educator,
mentor, facilitator, adviser, assistant, and coach. A person holding any one of these
titles has a responsibility to guide the studies of others, whether they are students,
mentees, athletes, etc. Through observation, during my experience in the field of
education, it is obvious that learning must be centered on and around the learner. It
does no good for a teacher to develop a lesson that is easy for him or herself to
understand. An instructors purpose is to present content in a way that is clear to the
learner, or better, that creates a situation for the learner to construct clear
understanding on his or her own.
I remember sitting in classes thinking to myself, how am I supposed to
remember all of this? while my teacher continued through the lecture. Learning and
meaning are something that has to come alive for students and allow them to actively
engage in the discovery process.
In recent years, technology has exploded among our country, namely in
classrooms. We have access to more information than ever before. There is increasing
ability to communicate and collaborate with people across the world in a matter of
seconds. So then, how does todays educator work in sync with emerging technologies?
Let us look back to Merriam-Websters definition of teacher: to guide the studies of.
This means that learners are the ones doing the discovering and exploring, while the
teacher is simply there to help navigate through the process.
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 4
Constructivism is among the latest of the emerging learning theories today. As
each theory is connected in some shape or form, whether building off of or directly
opposing another, we see that the common focus is the success of a learner in his or her
process of obtaining meaning. In this paper we will explore how technology integration,
when implemented by this constructivist approach to allow students room to construct
their own meaning, sets students up for success.

Constructivism Defined
It is often thought that constructivism and cognitivism are the same learning
theory. The cognitive learning theory declares that truth and knowledge is set and that
we must be uncover these realities through cognitive processing. Although
constructivism was derived out of this cognitive approach, it has many distinguishing
differences. Most famous among these differences is that humans create meaning
[constructivism] as opposed to acquiring it [cognitivism] (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). More
plainly stated, a constructivist believes each person creates his or her own version of
reality, where a cognitivist believes there is only one true reality that we are all
working to find. The focus behind constructivism is that humans attain understanding
through personal experiences. According to Dawn Garbett (2011), University of
Auckland New Zealand, it is the educators duty to provide these experiences for
students. This can be done through generating questions and situations that guide the
student through critical thinking activities in order to construct meaning for him or
herself. Garbett (2011) analyzes three steps to a constructivist approach in a classroom:
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 5
diagnose, engage, and evaluate. It is the engage portion of this process that allows
the student to take ownership of their learning. Learning is a personal experience,
(Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010). This is where technology, applied appropriately, enables
a student to manipulate his or her learning experience in order to shape personal
understanding.
The point of constructivism, engage, means to interact and involve oneself
with another. As the name proclaims, a constructivist must construct understanding.
To construct means to create, hypothesize, and collaborate to develop something.
Consider the following characteristics of a constructivist learning approach (Conole,
Dyke, Oliver, & Seale, 2004):
- Focus on the processes by which learners build their own mental structures
when interacting with an environment
- Pedagogical focus is task-orientated
- Favor hands-on, self-directed activities orientated towards design and discovery
- Useful for structured learning environments, such as simulated worlds;
construction of conceptual structures through engagement in self-directed tasks
To support a learning environment like this, Conole and his team suggest activities
including toolkits, microworlds, simulations, and resources that allow for student-
centered learning (Conole et. al., 2004). Technology is critical in order for this to take
place efficiently.


CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 6
Contributors
As stated previously, constructivism originates from cognitivism (Ertmer &
Newby, 1993). This theory is formed by a compilation of pieces from other theories of
learning developed primarily by Jean Piaget and Lev Semyonovich Vygosky (Scardamalia
& Bereiter, 2010). Constructivism is now seen as the new epistemology in philosophy as
well as education (Meyer, 2009). The constructivist theory is a framework for educators
to incorporate while building their curriculum. The idea behind a constructivist approach
is to model how learning takes place (Cobern, 1993). Venezky (2004) states that this
approach to learning follows the social model of Vygotsky and, to some degree, the
naturally developing states of Piaget (p.2). Venezky (2004) predicted that technologies
like the World Wide Web would have a vast impact on the transformation of our
education system. He states that a tool like that opens an expanding universe of
informational resources and allows for virtual communities across the world (p.1). It
is in just the last decade that we have seen astonishing expansion in education by the
integration of technology tools, on all levels, to engage students in constructing
meaning.

Technology Integration
What is considered technology? When this word is typed into Google, the first
ten images that upload are of iPads, cell phones, and computers. In the classroom, we
see technology as Smartboards, projectors, clickers, the Internet, etc. Technology has
been integrated into classrooms for years. According to Merrium-Websters online
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 7
dictionary, technology is a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical
(practical) processes, methods, or knowledge. In other words, it is a specific or strategic
way of achieving something. Technology tools allow students the means to enhance
their learning. William Cobern (1993), Arizona State University West, talks about
technology as instruments. instruments can be as simple as an ordinary ruler or as
complex as a radio telescope (p.2).
Knowing this, it is critical that educators realize that simply by integrating
technology, in itself, will not increase student engagement nor will it raise performance
(Charp, 2000). Effective integration of technology into instruction requires strategic
teacher planning. Charp (2000) advises that the success or failure of technology and its
integration into the instructional program is more dependent on human and contextual
forces than on hardware, software or connectivity (p.1). Whether it is a ruler, iPad, or
e-learning activity; a clear purpose must be established by the instructor for the student
to engage with the technology appropriately.

Technology in a Constructivist Approach
The interaction between the student and the learning environment is essential in
developing understanding (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Several studies prove that the
student-centered learning environment, advocate for constructivist learning, is the most
effective way for students to discover meaning.
The emphasis is not on retrieving intact knowledge structures, but on
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 8
providing learners with the means to create novel and situation-specific
understandings by assembling prior knowledge from diverse sources
appropriate to the problem at hand. (Ertmer & Newby, 1993).

One student-centered lesson structure that supports constructivist principles is
called the Learning Cycle. The Learning Cycle is an inquiry-based approach. As discussed
in one article, in this approach of learning the teachers role is to guide students to
recognize the expansion of their critical thinking skills (Bevevino, Dengel, & Adams,
1999). Teachers provide the framework, such as an e-learning virtual tour, so that
students can self-direct their discovery. Today, students are able to explore the world
first hand through features of technology. Apps and programs like TourWrist,
VoiceThread, Skype, and Facetime provide learners with authentic experiences that can
be manipulated from a simple computer or tablet screen.
In addition to these app and programs and the simple structure of emailing, new
collaboration tools like Cloud-computing, file sharing, Google Drive, Dropbox, Twitter,
blogging, Edmodo, MyBigCampus, and even YouTube give students the ability to
collaborate and communicate with peers globally.
Denton (2012), from Seattle Pacific University, talks about the benefits of Cloud
applications among students. Clouds are like a giant bank of information that can be
accessed, shared, or retrieved at any time. Furthermore, constructivism suggests that
bodies of knowledge are created collaboratively and that the results of these
constructions are influenced by time and place (p.35). Constructivists depend on
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 9
interaction with others in order to develop clear meaning and understanding. Cloud
applications provide a means for students to share their opinions and research with
others. Students are able to engage more freely in; group projects, peer assessment,
constructing presentations, simultaneous class discussions, assisted writing,
collaborative reflection, class inventory, collective rubric constructing, and website
publishing (Denton, 2012). Each of these components enables the student-centered
learning environment. According to Venezky (2004), it is through the World Wide Web
that Cloud computing and file sharing can be our platform as we create virtual
communities of teachers and of learners, to bring together in virtual spaces families,
schools and communities, and to give to every school, regardless of size and resources,
an expanding universe of informational resources (p.2). How much greater our
knowledge base is today, because of tools like this.
Molebash (2009) uses one example of this in a discussion on how technology
integration benefits students and educators within social studies curriculums. He
highlights a set of guidelines compiled by the College and University Faculty Assembly
(CUFA) that specifically address how technology should be integrated in this subject
area:
1. Extend learning beyond what could be done without technology.

2. Introduce technology in context.

3. Include opportunities for students to study relationships among
science, technology, and society.

4. Foster the development of the skills, knowledge, and participation as
good citizens in a democratic society.

CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 10
5. Contribute to the research and evaluation of social studies and
technology.

These five criteria fasten the gap between technology use and a
constructivist learning approach (Molebash, 2009). They require that technology engage
students in critical thinking and analytical skills. Although originally designed for social
studies curriculum, these principles can be applied in other content areas across all
grade levels. These guidelines provide students and teachers with a framework that
promotes a student-centered learning environment through technology. A framework
set in the context of a constructive learning environment.

Conclusion
Although there is still research being done on the constructivist approach
to technology integration, it is evident that our students learning experiences are only
becoming more efficient. If we look at the past twenty years, it is clear that technology
is not going to dissipate. District, state, and nation-wide educators are implementing a
variety of technology recourses, daily, in order to provide students situations where
their critical thinking skills are dynamically engaged and strengthened. Constructivism
has truly changed the way we perceive the world we live in. Through Cloud computing
and file sharing we can instantly tap into research, observations, and information
worldwide. No longer is knowledge just passed down and poured into student after
student like a factory production line. With the high integration of technology, students
are allowed to participate in constructing their own meaning. Today, we are blessed to
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 11
have the ability to collaborate with other learners across the world providing new and
larger perspective. We are designed to be life long learners, which means we must
obtain the skills to allow ourselves to continue learning in a world that is rapidly
expanding. And in support of a constructive approach, all learners must be willing to
participate and collaborate.

















CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 12

Bibliography
Azevedo, R., Behnagh, R.F., Duffy, M., Harley, J.M., & Trevors, G. (2012).
Metacognition and self-regulated learning in student-centered learning
environments. In Jonassen, D. & Land, S. (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of
learning environments (171-197). New York: Routledge.
Bevevino, M.M., Dengel, J., & Adams, K. (1999). Constructivist theory in the
classroom. Professional Development Collection, 72(5), 275-278. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/12YejZJ
Bitter, G., Lajeane, T., Kneek, D.G., Friske, J., Taylor, H., Weibe, J., & Kelly, M.G.
(Nov 19797). National association of secondary school principals: developing
new learning environments for classrooms today. NASSP Bulletin. (52-58).
Retrieved from: http://goo.gl/P03XP
Charp, S. (2000). Technology integration. THE Journal. 27(7), 8. Retreived from:
http://bit.ly/18lw4Sp
Cobern, W. (1993). Constructivism. Journal of Educational and Psychological
Consultation. 4(1), 105-112. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/193lx11
Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for
effective learning design. Computers and Education, 43(1-2). Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/18B1g3A
Denton, D.W. (2012). Enhancing instruction through constructivism, cooperative
learning, and cloud-computing. TechTrends. 56(4), 34-41.
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 13
Ely, D.P. (2008). Frameworks of educational technology. British Journal of
Educational Technology. 39(2), 244-250. Retrieved at: http://goo.gl/HI2Xt
Ertmer P. A., & Newby T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism:
comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective.
Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4).
Garbett, D. (2011). Constructivism deconstructed in science teacher education.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(6), 36-39. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/12VBLlF
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and
Instruction, 15(4), 485-529. Retrieved from:
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.boisestate.edu/stable/3233776?seq=6
Horton, R.M., & Marshall, J.C. (2011). The relationship of teacher-facilitated,
inquiry-based instruction to student higher-order thinking. School Science
and Mathematics, 111(3), 93-101.
McLeod, S. (2008). Bruner. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from:
http://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html
Meyer, D.L. (2009). The poverty of constructivism. Educational Philosophy and Theory.
41(3), 332-341. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/13RohxG
Molebash, P.E. (2009). Constructivism meets technology integration: the CUFA
technology guidelines in an elementary social studies methods course. Theory
and Research in Social Education. 30(3), 429-455. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1dF5PqK
CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 14
Quantz, R.A. (1997). Jerome bruner the culture of education. Educational Studies, 28(3-
4), 292. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/14j2CZY
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian
Journal of Learning and Technology. 36(1), 1-16. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/13P2kPD
Venezky, R. (2004). Technology in the classroom: steps toward a new vision. Education,
Communication, & Information. 4(1), 3-21. Retreived from:
http://bit.ly/18qWmWY