Theoretical model

The learning process and the educational theories

The learning and the theories that treat the processes of acquisition of knowledge have had fundamentally during this last century an enormous due development to the advances of the psychology and of the instructional theories that have tried to systematize the mechanisms associated to the mental processes that make possible the learning [Reigeluth, 1983].

The purpose of the educational theories is the one of to understand and to identify these processes and starting from them, to try to describe methods so that the instruction is more effective. It is in this last aspect in the one that mainly the instructional design is based that is based in identifying which they are the methods that should be used in the design of the instruction process, and also in determining these methods should be used in what situations.

Of agreement with [Reigeluth, 1987], of the combination of these elements (methods and situations) the principles and the theories of the learning are determined. A learning principle describes the effect of an only strategic component in the learning so that it determines the result of this component on the low enseñante some certain conditions. From the prescriptive point of view, a principle determines when it owes this component to be used. On the other hand, a theory describes the goods of a complete model of instruction, expert as an integrated group of strategic components instead of the goods of an isolated strategic component.

To this respect, the study of the mind and of the mechanisms that intervene in the learning it has been developed from several points of view based on the same fundamental question, that is: Which are the conditions that determine a more effective learning? [Gagné, 1987].

In a first place, from a psychological and pedagogic point of view, it is to identify what elements of knowledge they intervene in the teaching and which the conditions are under those that it is possible the learning. On the other hand, in the field of the instructional technology, it is to systematize this learning process by means of the identification of the mechanisms and of the mental processes that intervene in the same one. Both fields will serve as reference mark for the development of the education systems based on computer.

Learning theories

The learning theories from the psychological point of view have been associated to the realization of the pedagogic method in the education. The scenario in which is carried out the educational process determines the methods and the stimuli with those that it is carried out the learning. From a historical point of view, to big features they are three the educational tendencies that have had validity along the education: The social education, the liberal education and the progressive education [Holmes, 1999].

In the social education we are in a stage previous to the existence of educational institutions. In this context the education you can consider that it is exclusively oral and responsibility of the family and of the society that the guard and it transmits it. In this situation, the learning process is carried out in the social context and like part of the individual's integration in the group, process this that is carried out day by day along its life.

The classic pattern of education you can consider the liberal pattern, based on Plato's Republic, where this thinks about as a disciplined process and demanding. The learning process is based on the pursuit of a strict currículum where the matters are presented in form of a logical sequence that makes more coherent the learning.

In opposition to this it can be defined the pattern `` progressive '' that tries of helping the student in their educational process so that this it is perceived as a process `` natural ''. These theories have origin in the development of the social ideas of Rousseau and that they have had a great development in the second half of the century of John's hand Dewey in USA and of Jean Piaget in Europe [Dewey, 1933,Piaget, 1969,Piaget, 1970].

These three pedagogic currents have generally leaned on in several educational theories and cognitive models of the mind for the elaboration of the learning strategies. In many aspects, the development of these theories and of other derivative of them it is influenced by the technological context in which are applied, but fundamentally they have as consequence the development of elements of instructional design, like part of a modelizar process the learning, for that which is to investigate the mental mechanisms that intervene in the learning so much like those that describe the knowledge [O'Shea and Self, 1985,Fernández-Valmayor et to the., 1991 , Wilson et to the., 1993 ]. From this more oriented point of view to the psychology can be distinguished mainly two focuses: the focus behaviorist and the focus cognitivista.

The focus behaviorist

For the conductismo, the pattern of the mind behaves like a `` black box '' where the knowledge is perceived through the behavior, as external manifestation of the internal mental processes, although these last they are manifested unknown. From the point of view of the application of these theories in the instructional design, they were the works developed by B. F Skinner for the search of measures of effectiveness in the teaching the one that first it led the movement of the objective behaviorists [Skinner, 1958,Skinner, 1968,Tyler, 1975]. This way, the learning based on this paradigm suggests to measure the effectiveness in terms of results, that is to say, of the final behavior, for what this is conditioned by the immediate stimulus before the student's result, with object of providing a feedback or reinforcement to each one of the stocks of the same one. At the same time, models of design of the instruction are developed based on the behaviorism starting from the taxonomía formulated for [Bloom, 1956] and the later works of [Gagné, 1985] and also of M. D. Merrill [Merrill, 1980,Merrill, 1987,Merrill, 1994].

The critics to the behaviorism are based on the fact that certain types of alone learning provide a quantitative description of the behavior and they don't allow to know the internal state in which is the individual neither the mental processes that could facilitate or to improve the learning.

The focus cognitivista

The cognitive theories have their main exponent in the constructivismo [Bruner, 1966,Piaget, 1969,Piaget, 1970]. The constructivismo in fact covers a wide spectrum of theories about the knowledge that you/they are based in that the knowledge exists in the mind like internal representation of an external reality [Duffy and Jonassen, 1992]. The learning in the constructivismo has an individual dimension, since when residing the knowledge in the own mind, the learning is seen as a process of construction individual intern of this knowledge [Jonassen, 1991].

On the other hand, this individual constructivismo, represented for [Papert, 1988] and based on the ideas of J. Piaget is opposed to the new school of the social constructivismo. In this line the most recent works are based of [Bruner, 1990] and also of [Vigotsky, 1978] that develop the idea of a social perspective of the knowledge that you/they have given place to the appearance of new educational paradigms in the teaching for computer, as those described in [Koschmann, 1996,Barros, 1999].

Another of the theories educational cognitivistas is the conexionismo. The conexionismo is fruit of the investigation in artificial intelligence, neurology and computer science for the creation of a model of the processes neuronales. For the theories conexionistas the mind is a natural machine with a net structure where the knowledge resides in form of patterns and relationships among neurons and that it is built by means of the experience [Edelman, 1992,Sylwester, 1993]. In the conexionismo, the external knowledge and the representation mental intern they don't keep direct relationship, that is to say, the net non modeliza or it reflects the external reality because the representation is not symbolic but based on a certain reinforcement of the connections due to the experience in a certain situation.

The computer in the education

The origin of the automatic instruction, expert as a process that doesn't need of the intervention of a professor, has her roots before even of the appearance of the first computers toward half-filled of the years 40.

Already in 1912, E. L. Thorndike aimed the idea of a car-aided material or of a scheduled teaching in an automatic way, in what can be considered a vision precursor of that that later understood each other as assisted instruction:
`` If, by to miracle of modern ingenuity, to book could be arranged so that only to him who had donates what was directed on page one would page two visible become, and so on, much that now requires personal instruction could be managed by print. `` (p. 165) [Thorndike, 1912]
Later on, it is not until the years 50, when the teaching attended by computer arises, expert as the application of the computer technology to provide teaching, and as the technological solution to the process of individualized instruction.

In general, it is commonly accepted that the birth of the discipline of the `` on-line assisted instruction '' and of the first instructional foundations of the same one he/she is carried out toward half-filled of the years 50 of the hand of the theories behaviorists, already mentioned, of B. F. Skinner with the publication of the article `` The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching '' who first it aims the deficiencies of the traditional instruction techniques and establishing that these could improve with the use of that that then were denominated teaching machines. The paradigm in which is inspired for the development from the applied technology to the teaching is the one that then is denominated `` scheduled instruction '', of which was pioneer the North American psychologist S. J. Pressey, and that he/she settles on the base that the material instructional debit side to be compound for a series of small `` steps '', each one of those which precise of the student's active answer who receives an instantaneous feedback in the use of the same ones.

According to these design principles, the student should conserve capacity at every moment to come in a free way in the material and conserving what you/they are defined as three fundamental principles of the scheduled instruction: The development of the car-stimulus in the use of the systems, the student's active participation and the feedback during the use of the systems [Pressey, 1964,Gagné, 1987].

In the following years initiatives like the realized ones are continued by the investigators of IBM for the creation of computer systems for the teaching, in what you already began to know as Computer Assisted Instruction (I FELL), term that has been used until our days. Along the following decade the use of systems is developed for the individual learning based on the paradigm of the scheduled instruction and he/she is prolonged until half-filled of the 70 with having sometimes been adverse, in general guided to contrast that the effectiveness of the educational materials based on the traditional teaching was not worse than those based ones in the scheduled instruction [Tyler, 1975]. Starting from this moment other more oriented pedagogic focuses are also developed toward the cognitivismo but now based on the systems I FELL [Reigeluth, 1987].

Parallelly, at the beginning of the years 70 a proposal arises to improve the systems I FELL with the application of the techniques of Artificial intelligence, in complete peak in that moment. To this respect it was [Carbonell, 1970] with their article `` AI in I FELL: Artificial An Intelligence Approach to Computer Aided Instruction '' and the development of the SCHOLAR a system intelligent tutor for the teaching of the geography of America of the South who sat down the bases for the development of the calls ICAI (Intelligent FELL) that you can consider as the starting point of the Systems Intelligent Tutors (ITS), term coined for [Sleeman and Brown, 1982].

Carbonell proposes to the Intelligent Tutors as substitutes of the systems I FELL, as consequence to a series of critics that you/they are carried out to these last and that they are mainly: the student lacks own initiative or this is very limited; you cannot use the natural language in the answers; the systems FELL they are too rigid and lacking of own initiative since her behavior is preprogramed; and they don't possess `` actual knowledge ''.
In the following years they intend generic architectures for these systems that develop the modelización of three types of knowledge: the student's pattern, the pattern of the educational strategy and the pattern of knowledge of the domain or of the matter, architecture this that continues being valid at the present time [Wenger, 1987].

The mark of reference of the IA in the education has marked the development of the education systems attended by computer partly and it has established the development of the Intelligent Tutors as the main paradigm of the educational systems based on computer until our days [Murray, 1999,Andriessen and Sandberg, 1999]. However the ITS manifests an extreme difficulty in the practice for the complex thing that they are the cognitive models that intervene in their design, like Terry aims Mayes:

`` The immense dificulty of modelling domain, learner and tutorial strategy in to computationally and pedagogically effective way, have raised many fundamental questions about the viability of this type of approach and led some to abandon ITS approaches altogether '' [Mayes and Neilson, 1995].

On one hand the tutors they are restricted to a particular domain, not being easy to adapt them and to configure them for other domains. Also, they implement a certain teaching strategy that depends on the student's pattern to modify it or to personalize it. They are systems of an enormous complexity in which you/they stand out as much purely computer aspects as the current limitations of the Artificial intelligence or the educational psychology whose foundations you has not ended up understanding completely [O'Shea and Self, 1985,Manjón, 1996].

This way, the search of practical solutions has been diversified in some cases and in the position of new educational paradigms fewer centered in the behaviorism and that they are opposed to the metaphor of the `` computer like tutor '' that is taken to end in the ITS. On one hand the proposals based on the creation of scenarios for the realization of activities in group appear, where to put into practice the theories cognitivistas of the social constructivismo that have been translated in the development of systems based on the cooperative work (CSCW) and more concretely in the educational environment, the cooperative learning attended by computer (CSCL) [Crook, 1994]. On the other hand new educational metaphors have been developed based on the simulation and in the development of environments hipermedia [Jonassen and Grabinger, 1990], as basic technologies in the focus constructivista [Jonassen et to the., 1992 ].

This last, the hypertext concept and hipermedia appear by the middle of the years 60 like a new form of organization of the information based on nodes and connections of textual information or multimedia that form a net that allows to increase the journey possibilities, it consults and access to the material. In a system hipermedia, the user can determine the sequence by means of which consents to the information, providing in some cases the necessary interactivity to add additional nodes. The interactivity level varies with the system type and the purpose of the same one [Jonassen and Grabinger, 1990,Bieber, 1995].

The utility of these systems of information for educational uses was aimed from the first moment due to the capacity to represent conceptual domains and to simulate the interactivity of the environment by means of the offer to the student of several possibilities of choosing the journeys for the material.

In [Fernández-Valmayor et to the., 2000 ] three different focuses are described for the design of material educational hipermedia:

A first approach based on the design of the educational contents that you/they are articulated in courses, lessons, exercises and tests. The content pattern is oriented toward a similar focus to the organization of the databases and centered in the idea of the structuring of the educational domain.
The second focus is based on the pattern hypertext, in the one that you modeliza an educational domain as a net of components of a certain granularidad and where the user's interactions come given by the decisions that this he/she carries out during the sailing for the material.

In third place the system is centered in the student and in its necessities where the design is carried out adapting it to the student's previous knowledge and the potential interactions of this with the environment. In this sense there is a previous analysis of the interactions with the environment from a pedagogic point of view and this allows to incorporate some new learning paradigms in the system.

These aspects, also guided to the constructivismo, they have tried to replace the lack of a tutor that allows the interaction with the enseñante by means of the use of environments that you/they exercise diverse learning types included in the call learning based on projects and the scenarios based on goals as much as possible [Schank, 1990,Schank and Edelson, 1990,Schank, 1996,Henze and Nejdl, 1997].

On the other hand, supported in the hipermedia concepts, they have also been developed the calls systems adaptativos, with a similar focus to that of the systems tutors [Brusilowsky, 1995] and it has been deepened in the development of complex environments providing technical of design with more elaborated models of information [Schwabe and Rossi, 1995,Isakowitz et to the., 1995 , Nanard and Nanard, 1995] and more extended educational uses [Díaz et to the., 1998 ].

Another proposal in this line is the development of learning environments that you/they try to capture the wealth of the interaction as much as possible with the professor or the tutor by means of the recreation of the dialogues professor-student. This idea, led for [Laurillard, 1993] and collection in [Mayes and Neilson, 1995], it embraces several works like the Engines for Education of [Schank and Cleary, 1994] and also the proposals of [Ackerman and Malowne, 1990] and [Thomas, 1993], and they constitute an approach to a type of based learning in an interaction in form of questions and answers that are an important ingredient in the learning process, mainly when the real interaction with the tutor is not possible [Verdejo and Cerri, 1994,Hietala et to the., 1998 ].

It is in this last aspect in which intends the creation of scenarios based on a new type of instructional material that you/they provide the necessary wealth to carry out an educational work in the mark of the higher education. This focus is specially necessary in the case of the teaching at distance, where the access to the professor is restricted and there is not an interaction that facilitates the feedback in the learning process.

Theories of the Learning and the Practice of the Instructional Design

Which is the difference among the learning theory in terms of the practice of the instructional design? Is it maybe an approach easier of achieving that another? To be able to give answer to this queries we should take into account that the cognitive theory is the one that dominates in the instructional design and that most of the Instructional strategies that have been protected and used by the behaviorists, they have also been used thoroughly by the cognoscitivistas, auque for different reasons. For example, the behaviorists evaluate the apprentices to determine a beginning point for the instruction, while the cognoscitivistas looks for the bias to the student's learning (Ertmer and Newby, 1993). Therewith in mind, the practice of the instructional design one can see, from the perspective of the conductismo/cognoscitivismo, as something opposed to the approach of the design instructional constructivista.

When it is designed from the position conductista/cognoscitivista, the designer analyzes the situation and the group of goals to achieve. The tasks or individual activities are subdivided in learning objectives. The evaluation consists on determining if the approaches of the objectives have been reached. In this approach the designer decides what is important to learn for the student and he tries to transfer him that knowledge. The learning package is somehow a closed system, although it would be opened in some ramifications or remediaciones, here, the apprentice in any way is confined to the “world” of the designer or of the instructor.

For the design from an approach constructivista is required the designer to produce strategies and materials of nature much more facilitadora that prescriptive. The contents are not specified, the address is determined by the one that learns and the evaluation is much more subjective since it doesn't depend on specific quantitative approaches, but in its place the processes are evaluated and the apprentice carries out autoevaluaciones. The test with the help of paper and standard pencil of domain of learnings is not used in a design instructional constructivista; in its place they are carried out evaluations based on summaries or synthesis, lines, completed products and publications. (Assessment, in it lines).

Due to the divergence of the subjective nature of the learning constructivista it is easier for an instructional designer to work from the systems and this way the objective approach for the instructional design. This doesn't mean that the techniques of design instructional classics are better than those of the design constructivista, but if they are easier, they require of smaller time and they could be less expensive for the design inside a “closed system” instead of one open. Maybe really have something in saying that “the constructivismo is a “learning theory” more than a “teaching approach.” (Wilkinson, 1995)

You index and Bibliography

Assessment in a constructivist learning environment. [On-line] http://www.coe.missouri.edu:80tiger.coe.missouri.edu/
Bednar, A.K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M., Perry, J.P. (1995). Theory into practice: How do we link? In G.J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd ed., pp. 100-111)., Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Behaviorism and constructivism. [On-line]. Available: http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/debbie/CADVANT.HTM
Behaviorism. [On-line]. Available: http://sacam.oren.ortn.edu/~ssganapa/disc/behave.html
Beyond constructivism - contextualism. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/cx_intro.html
Black, E. (1995). Behaviorism as a learning theory. [On-line]. Available: http://129.7.160.115/inst5931/Behaviorism.html
Bracy, B. (Undated) Emergent learning technologies. [On-line]. Available: gopher://unix5.nysed.gov/00/TelecommInfo/Reading%20Room%20Points%20View
Burney, J. D. (Undated). Behaviorism and B. F. Skinner. [On-line]. Available: http://www2.una.edu/education/Skinner.htm
Conditions of learning (R. Gagne). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/gagne.html
Constructivist theory (J. Bruner). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/bruner.html
Cunningham, D. J. (1991). Assessing constructions and constructing assessments: A dialogue. Educational Technology, May, 13-17.
Davidson, K. (1998). Education in the internet--linking theory to reality. [On-line]. Available: http://www.oise.on.ca/~kdavidson/cons.html
Dembo, M. H. (1994). Applying educational psychology (5th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
Dick, W. (1991). An instructional designer's view of constructivism. Educational Technology, May, 41-44.
Dorin, H., Demmin, P. E., Gabel, D. (1990). Chemistry: The study of matter. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Duffy, T. M., Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technolgy? Educational Technology, May, 7-12.
Ertmer, P. A., Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6 (4), 50-70.
Genetic epistemology (J.Piaget). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/piaget.html
Good, T. L., Brophy, J. E. (1990). Educational psychology: A realistic approach. (4th ed.).White Plains, NY: Longman
Information processing theory and instructional technology. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/IPTools.html
Information process theory of learning. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/IPTheorists.html
Jonassen, D. H. (1991) Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39 (3), 5-14.
Jonasson, D.H. (Undated). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. [On-line]. Available: http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~slsanfor/cnstdm.txt
Jonassen, D. H., McAleese, T.M.R. (Undated). A Manifesto for a constructivist approach to technology in higher education. [On-line]. Available:http://led.gcal.ac.uk/clti/papers/TMPaper11.html
Khalsa, G. (Undated). Constructivism. [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~etl/khalsa.html
Kulikowski, S. (Undated). The constructivist tool bar. [On-line]. Available: http://www.coe.missouri.edu:80tiger.coe.missouri.edu/
Learning theory: Objectivism vs constructivism.[On-line]. Available: http://media.hku.hk/cmr/edtech/Constructivism.html
Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five principles toward a new mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41 (3), 4-16.
Lewis, D. (1996). Perspectives on instruction. [On-line]. Available: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtech540/Perspectives/Perspectives.html
Lieu, M.W. (1997). Final project for EDT700, Learning theorists and learning theories to modern instructional design. [On-line]. Available: http://www.itec.sfsu.edu/faculty/kforeman/edt700/theoryproject/index.html
Merrill, M. D. (1991). Constructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology, May, 45-53.
Military. [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/military.html
Operant conditioning (B.F. Skinner). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/skinner.html
Operant conditioning and behaviorism - an historical outline. [On-line]. Available: http://www.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de/genetics/behavior/learning/behaviorism.html
Perkins, D. N. (1991). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? Educational Technology , May, 18-23.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1989). Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 1042-1629.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1995). What is the new paradigm of instructional theory. [On-line]. Available: http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper17/paper17.html
Reigeluth, C. M. (1996). A new paradigm of ISD? Educational Technology, May-June, 13-20.
Reigeluth, C. (Undated). Elaboration theory. [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/reigelut.html
Rizo,F.M. (1991). The controversy about quantification in social research: An extension of Gage's "historical sketch." Educational Researcher, 20 (12), 9-12
Saettler, P. (1990). The evolution of american educational technology . Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Schiffman, S. S. (1995). Instructional systems design: Five views of the field. In G.J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd ed., pp. 131-142)., Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Schuman, L. (1996). Perspectives on instruction. [On-line]. Available: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec540/Perspectives/Perspectives.html
Schwier, R. A. (1995). Issues in emerging interactive technologies. In G.J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd ed., pp. 119-127)., Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Schwier, R. A. (1998). Schwiercourses, EDCMM 802, Unpublished manuscript, University of Saskatchewan at Saskatoon, Canada.
Shank, P. (Undated). Constructivist theory and internet based instruction. [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~etl/shank.html
Skinner, Thorndike, Watson. [On-line]. Available: http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~rsauzier/Thorndike.html
Smorgansbord, A., (Undated). Constructivism and instructional design. [On-line]. Available: http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/smorgan/cons.html
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, M. J., Coulson, R. J. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, May, 24-33.
White, A. (1995) Theorists of behaviorism. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/btheorists.html
Wilkinson. G.L. (Ed.) (1995). Constructivism, objectivism, and isd. IT forum discussion, April 12 to August 21, 1995. [On-line]. Available: http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/extra4/disc-ex4.html
Wilson, B. G. (1997). Thoughts on theory in educational technology. Educational Technology, January-February, 22-27.
Wilson, B. G. (1997). Reflections on constructivism and instructional design. [On-line]. Available: http://www.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/construct.html