Personal Theory of Learning and. Application to Practice. Pat Anderchek. MDDE 603, Foundations of Instructional Design:

Transcription

1 Personal Theory of Learning and Application to Practice Pat Anderchek MDDE 603, Foundations of Instructional Design: Systems Analysis and Learning Theory Professor: Erv Schieman December 12, 2005

2 Introduction There exist many different theories about the process of teaching and learning; some are particularly relevant to my personal philosophy, others less so. The purpose of this paper is to describe my personal theory of practice incorporating the salient points of the various learning theories, and then demonstrate the application of my personal theory in relation to a specific course design. A daunting task, perhaps, yet one that offers not only challenges in the analysis and synthesis of the various concepts covered in the course, but one that provides the opportunity to articulate my view of learning into three primary learning principles, with subsequent instructional guidelines; an assignment encompassing many of the components of the various learning theories studied in this course! In order to begin the process of identifying my personal theory of practice it is important to have an understanding of the concept of learning. Driscoll (2005) defines learning as occurring when learners are able to perform actions they could not perform before the learning occurred. She suggests that when learning has occurred, there is a change in performance or performance potential as a result of the learner's experiences and interactions with the world. The various learning theories range in their views of learning; learning as knowledge acquisition, learning as knowledge construction, and learning as a response to rewards which lead to behaviours changes. (Mayer, 1999) All theories agree that in order for learning to occur it requires experience; it is how these experiences interact and lead to learning which is expressed differently in each theory. As there are many different theories about the process of learning, we must evaluate each separate theory for what it illuminates about learning and for how it can guide the development of effective instruction. (Driscoll, p. 411). Effective instruction is a goal of the MDE program and my personal goal, both within my own course deliveries, and within the courses offered by others in our college, as I

3 am in the privileged position of teaching in a college program and also providing educational opportunities for faculty wishing to enhance their teaching and learning skills. In my role, I have a specific focus on supporting faculty in the effective implementation of e-learning in their learning spaces, which explains my enrollment in the AU courses. Many learning theories provide insights into this task and as Driscoll (2005) articulates "what one theory conceals, another illuminates" (p. 261). Throughout this paper I will attempt to describe how these illuminations inform my practice and support my three learning principles. Emergence of My Theory of Practice It is important for me to articulate how my personal theory of practice has emerged, having grown and developed through my participation in the various Athabasca University courses, and in the context of my previous experiences, daily practical applications, interactions with coworkers and within several communities of practice which have significant influence on my learning. Although the heart of my philosophy and principles of teaching and learning have remained constant, it is my ability to understand and articulate more clearly why I do the things I do in my learning spaces that has improved dramatically. I am now aware of many things I did not know, particularly the theoretical basis for much of what I did in practice, and I am aware of many areas I wish to explore further; concepts such as motivation, communities of practice, the different positions of constructivism, and the application of various instructional design principles to actual course delivery. As is the transformative process of education, it is impossible to discern what I might have done intuitively within my course design and delivery and what I now do based upon sound principles and guidelines of learning. As a Child and Youth Worker by profession, my skills and knowledge focus on the importance of relationship-building in order to facilitate change and growth in youth. I know through practice that

4 children and youth learn most effectively by doing and Piaget s theory of learning supports this assumption. Piaget's theory, as found in Driscoll (2005) suggests it is critical "to provide a rich learning environment that supports activity and encourages interactions with peers" (p. 419). Through interactions with peers, Child and Youth Workers and with therapeutic activities, youth develop skills, increase their self esteem and consequently develop increased choices in their lives, a process not significantly different than the processes inherent in education. The profession of Child and Youth Worker has set the foundation for my role as an educator and my present theory of practice. Although applied originally as a Child and Youth Worker, the concepts of interactivity, previous experience and self-directedness form the basis of my three principles of learning. This paper will first describe the theories in terms of their general influence on my practice, and I will articulate both the theoretical basis for these concepts and their application in course design and delivery. Theories of Learning Which theories inform my personal theory of practice and which ones, while providing relevant constructs, have less influence on my day-to-day practice? As all the theories offer a way of viewing learning, I will apply an eclectic approach, highlighting the constructs from each theory which are relevant to my practice, on a continuum of minimal relevance to those most relevant in my day-to-day learning spaces and instructional design. The least relevant theory is the biological basis of learning; although its main constructs are important in learning, they do not have significant influence on my day-to-day design. As a Child and Youth Worker and educator I understand the interactive relationship between nature and nurture and the concept of critical periods for development, although the focus of this theory is more on children and youth, and therefore not relevant on a daily basis to my role as a college educator. Nor is the concept of

5 attempting to understand ancestral environmental conditions to gain clues about present day human cognitive mechanisms; although interesting, these ideas are not particularly influential in my daily practice. The most relevant concept in the biological theories is that greater emphasis should be placed on cooperation in learning, as this is how we survived in our ancestral environment. Although I would agree cooperative learning is an important component to learning, it is more than adequately addressed in other theories such as Situated Cognition and Constructivist theories. Although not a theory specifically about learning, the systems theory provides the basis for understanding all the components of my practice as it links my learning principles and learning spaces to the philosophy and strategic plan of the larger institution, to the goals of my department, and the various programs, staff, learners and courses with which I interact. The systems theory also provides insight into understanding the importance of the process of continuous feedback that must occur not only institutionally but from educator to learner and vice-versa. Bethany's model of system analysis (1995) consisting of the systems-environment lens, the function-structure lens and the processbehaviour lens provides a unique perspective for understanding the college and it subsystems, of which my personal theory and practice are a small component. Employing a systems approach, our learning environments must be integrated environments, ones that are learner-centred, knowledge-centred, assessment-centred and community-centred, as Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000) articulate. If biological theories of learning are the least relevant to my day-to-day practice, the most relevant is the Constructivist Theory, as it encompasses and expands many concepts from other learning theories. It borrows concepts such as communities of practice, a basic premise in Situated Cognition, to meaningful learning, which is a component of Cognitive Information Processing Theory and Meaningful Learning and Schema Theory. Constructivist Theory assumes that knowledge is constructed by learners as they attempt to make sense of their experiences, and views learners as active

6 rather than passive participants in the learning process. Although it provides limited explanation of models of memory, it is the theory most influential on my practice. As effective models of memory are illuminated in other theories such as Cognitive Information Processing and Schema Theory, these theories are consequently located in the middle of the continuum of influence, as is Piaget's theory of development which focuses primarily on the development of children. Principles of Learning Although the various theories range in their impact upon my day-to-day practice and principles for learning, my three principles all include concepts identified and supported by the various theories studied in this course. My principles of learning suggest the most effective learning occurs when: 1. Learners engage in the learning process through interactions with the content, other learners and the educator. 2. Previous experiences are viewed as major learning resources and the learner has enough prior knowledge to be successful in the learning tasks. 3. Learners are encouraged to become increasingly self-directed and assume responsibility for their own learning. Each of these principles reflects not only the concepts inherent in my professional practice, as both a Child and Youth Worker and educator, but are concepts that have been identified within each of the theories as key components to a "learner-centred" institution which focuses on the knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs that learners bring to the educational setting and allows for teaching practices which are culturally responsive. (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000).) These principles are

7 interrelated and interconnected in a systematic view of learning, not only to learner-centered practices, but to knowledge, assessment and community-centred practices; they cannot be considered in isolation. Principle 1 Learning occurs most effectively when: Learners engage in the learning process through their interactions with course content, other learners and the educator. As this principle suggests, the process of learner engagement can be articulated into three distinct areas; learner-content, learner-educator and learner-learner interaction. It can be argued that the amount of interaction influences the degree of learning, and interaction, or at the very least the potential of interactivity, must be present in distance education course design. (Kearsley, 1995). Let us review each of these areas in the context of the theories which support them. a) Interactions with course content It is important to engage learners in thinking about content and most theories of learning support this principle. Cognitive Information Processing theory provides significant insights into this area. Repetition and rehearsal of content, concept maps, graphics, mnemonics, and self-questioning are all means by which the learner interacts with content. This leads to effective encoding of information, which is considered in Cognitive Information Processing as learning, and information, once encoded or learned, is then available for retrieval at a later date. Meaningful Learning and Schema theory build on the Cognitive Information Processing theory and suggest that an individual's cognitive structure provides the overall framework in which new information is processed, and learners should engage with content through thought-demanding activities. Schemas are modes of organization and learning occurs when new information is added to these. Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development such

8 as Brunner and Vygotsky support the importance of interaction with content through the processes of inquiry, problem solving and problem-based learning. Additionally, the main concepts of the Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), which are derived from Radical Behaviourism, focus on learner interaction with content. PSI recommends that course materials be organized into modules with behavioural objectives on which learners focus through selfpaced individualized study, incurring immediate feedback until unit mastery is reached. In PSI additional instructional techniques and interactions are considered as supplemental to the core interactions with course content. Lastly, the Constructivist approach suggests that interaction with content is critical to learning. "Revisiting the same material, at different times, in rearranged contexts, for different purposes and from different conceptual perspectives is essential for attaining advanced knowledge acquisition" (Spiro et, al., 1991, as quoted in Driscoll, p. 398) and for developing a wide and diverse knowledge base. Learner interaction with the content as supported by these various theories is clearly a critical design consideration and although essential to learning, it is not the only form of interaction to be considered in this principle; interactions with the educator is also critical. b) Interactions with the educator The availability and quality of interaction with the educator has a significant impact on the process of learning and is a fundamental component to this learning principle. Kearsley (1995) states that the potential of interactivity with the educator "is an important design factor in distance education courses, even if most learners do not take advantage of it." (p. 88) Brookfield (1987) states that encouraging learning through relationships and building trust with learners "is the affective glue binding educational relationships together (p.163) and this supports the Situated Cognition Theory which holds that learner interactions with the educator are critical. Learners not only learn by doing what experts do; they also learn from the experts in the form of cognitive apprenticeships. The Radical Behaviourist theory contends it is the educators' role to model desired behaviours and use positive reinforcement as the

9 primary means of encouraging learning. Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development also support the importance of interaction with the instructor, as does Piaget, quoted in Driscoll (2005) who suggests that interactions with the educator should lead to cognitive conflicts and stimulate disequilibrium, making learners aware of inconsistencies in their thinking. The Constructivist approach also supports interaction with the educator as fundamental to learning and contends that it is important for learners to have the opportunity to test their own understandings against those of the teacher (Driscoll, p. 388) and that educators should support learner efforts, encourage reflection of the learning process and provide just enough help and guidance to learners in the learning process in order for them to be successful. These theories support the principle that interaction with the educator has a significant impact on learning and is therefore a major component of this learning principle and subsequent instructional guidelines. The last form of interaction to be addressed within this principle, and one inherent to most of the theories of learning, is the critical role that interaction with other learners plays in the learning process. c) Interactions with other learners Collaboration in the learning environment has become an increasingly important feature in more recent theories and moves the focus of learning from the individual, the premise of Cognitive Information Processing and Behaviourist theories, to communities of practice, the foundation of Situated Cognition theory. Situated Cognition contends that we are social beings and interactions with other learners are central to the process of learning. Learning is viewed as increasing participation in communities of practice, and through these interactions learners and communities are transformed in a reciprocal process; as learners change, they in turn influence and change their communities of practice. This

10 theory contends that learner interactions lead to transformation of all parties and of one's culture, the true application of knowledge. Cognitive and knowledge development theories such as Piaget also encourage interaction with peers and suggest social knowledge is obtained only through interactions with others. Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development also see learning as a social enterprise and support the importance of interaction with peers and the sociocultural environment. The Biological theory has relevance to my practice primarily with this concept as it supports greater emphasis on cooperation in learning, which also concurs with Bruner and Vygotsky's ideas that when learners work in the same groups they must work out their social differences and develop cooperative behaviours to reach their goals. Both theories recommend mixed-aged groups as the most effective communities of practice, since age differences occurred naturally in foraging societies and different skill and knowledge levels bring about cognitive development of the less advanced learner. The Constructivist approach borrows and enhances the principle of interaction amongst learners as critical to learning from Situated Cognition, which states that "higher mental processes in humans develop through social interactions." (Driscoll, p. 396) Collaboration is viewed in the Constructivist approach as an essential feature of the learning environment as it "allows insights and solutions to develop synergistically that would not otherwise come about". (Brown et al., 1989 as quoted in Driscoll, p. 396) and only through members working together will they have the necessary knowledge to solve certain problems. Through this community of practice, learners develop an understanding of others points of views, which they can use to judge the quality of their own understandings and potentially learn more effective strategies for solving problems. Learning activities "must reflect the complexity of the real world in which learners must function after the planned learning activities have occurred" (Kanuka & Anderson, 1999, p.30) and learner-learner interactions reflect this reality.

11 As articulated through these numerous theories, interaction amongst learners is clearly a fundamental component to any learning space and interactivity in all its forms must be present at some level for effective learning to occur. The online learning environment presents even greater challenges for the inclusion of interactivity than does the traditional classroom, and benefits from ongoing improvements in learning technologies. Technology offers an effective means to implement interactive strategies and supports increased interaction with a variety of learners and sources. Each theory offers many strategies for effective instructional design and although not an exhaustive list, see Appendix #1 for several instructional strategies related to Principle One. The lists of Instructional Strategies have been derived from a variety of sources including Driscoll (2005) and have been reorganized into the framework of my three principles of learning. These lists now serve as a personal checklist for effective instructional design. All the theories studied in this course support the principle of interactivity as a critical component to learning; although on its own interaction may not necessarily result in learning. Learner motivation is inter-related with interactivity and will be expanded more in Principle Three under the concept of selfdirectedness. Previous experience, the focus of Principle Two, is also connected to interactivity and helps to explain how these various forms of interactivity result in learning. Principle 2 Learning occurs most effectively when: Previous experiences are viewed as major learning resources and the learner has enough prior knowledge to be successful in the learning tasks. Although this concept was articulated originally by Knowles in his concept of andragogy, it continues to have relevance in today's practice. The previous experiences of the learner must be viewed as major learning resources, as learners come to learning activities with varying interests and experiences,

12 making connections to what they already know. This connection between learning and prior knowledge is well addressed by the Cognitive Information Processing Theory; what has been learned or experienced previously has significant impact on what is perceived in later situations. Meaningful Learning and Schema Theory also emphasizes the role of prior learning and suggests it is important to activate prior knowledge in order for the learner to manage new materials. Anchoring ideas within the learner's cognitive structure are viewed as prerequisites to meaningful learning and this occurs through information being organized as subordinate, superordinate or coordinated within existing information and structures which have been created through prior learning. This theory also considers cultural experiences as prior learning, as does the Situated Cognition theory. As educators we must begin with the culture in which the learner resides, respect their communities of practice and view their experiences as major learning resources in the process of learning. Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development suggest prior learning is critical in creating "a well prepared mind". Through discovery learning, the "well prepared mind" is necessary in order to be successful in solving any problem, and the ability to solve problems requires enough prior knowledge to be successful in the task. Educators must ascertain what learners already know and what gaps exist in their knowledge and reasoning, and provide guided interaction. "Guided practice in inquiry and sufficient prior knowledge constitute minimum conditions for discovery learning to be successful". (Driscoll, p. 236) Additionally, prior learning is viewed as a fundamental component to Constructivist theories which according to Perkins, (1991) as quoted in Driscoll, contend that educators must coach learners who do not have adequate entry skills, and "hold learners in their 'zone of proximal development' by providing just enough help and guidance but not too much." (p. 392). As an educator, the role of prior learning is clearly significant in the learning process as it provides the basis on which new information is organized, and relevant prior learning is essential for learners to be successful in the completion of learning tasks. This principle is also supported by numerous theories and must be

13 considered as fundamental to course design. To view a set of specific instructional guidelines related to Principle 2 see Appendix #2. A learner's prior experiences also create expectations of the learning environment and of the educator. These expectations have significant impact on learner motivation which will now be addressed under principle three. Principle 3 Learning occurs most effectively when: Learners are encouraged to become increasingly self-directed and assume responsibility for their own learning. This principle has two inter-related components; the role of the educator to encourage and support the development of self-directedness, and the role of the learner to become increasing self-directed and assume responsibility for their own learning. The concept of learner motivation is inherent in this principle as is the assumption that self-directedness is a desirable and necessary condition for learning. From a Constructivist point of view, it is the role of the educator, through the concepts of coaching and scaffolding, to support the learner to become increasingly self-directed and to assume responsibility for their learning. Critics of the Constructivist view suggest self-directedness is seldom found in learners and question whether learners are really prepared to take ownership and manage their own learning. Its rarity, however, in no sense weakens the view that the enhancement of self-directedness is the proper purpose of education; instead it provides a compelling reason why educators should pursue this end with unflagging zeal (Brookfield, 1986, p.95). The concept of self-directedness is foundational to learning, can be applied cross-culturally and links to the principle of previous experience as it allows learners to focus their learning according to their own unique traditions, culture, learning style, experiences and needs. Learners who are actively involved in

14 determining their own learning needs and how those needs can best be met tend to be motivated and successful learners. Educators have a responsibility to assist learners in the movement from dependency towards increasing self-directedness, and design courses that are not only appealing to learners but will facilitate learners self-regulatory skills, whereby they can monitor their progress toward meeting their desired goals, become more self-aware, and assume increasing responsibility for their own learning. Learner motivation is also inherent in this principle and according to Keller, as quoted in Driscoll (1993) motivation is the initial determining factor that colours everything that follows in an individual's learning. It determines the magnitude, the degree of effort, and the goal orientation of a person's learning behaviour. In order to have a motivated learner, Keller proposed the ARCS model; A- attention, R-relevance, C-confidence, and S-satisfaction, suggesting that as educators we can increase learner motivation with strategies that gain attention, enhance relevance, foster confidence and ensure satisfaction. Spritzer (1996) suggests "adult learners are internally motivated and want to learn the things they need to learn and suggests that learning will be no greater than the learner's level of motivation". (p. 171) Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development and Radical Behaviourism address issues of motivation and feedback or reinforcement as key to learning, although Radical Behaviourism cannot account for, or adequately explain, the concept of intrinsic motivation. Constructivists articulate motivation in terms of ownership of learning and suggest that in order to motivate learners it is necessary to provide complex and realistic learning environments, support learners to be aware of their own role in the knowledge construction process, and persuade them to think about both the content and the learning process. The basis for learning in the Constructivist theory is in facilitating ownership of learning so learners become self-directed, autonomous learners, or the learner must already be self-directed in order for learning to occur. "Students who are motivated to learn will have greater success than those who are not". (Hodges, 2004, p. 1)

15 This principle and the concept of self-directedness and learner motivation have many additional components which impact learning, including metacognition and self-efficacy beliefs. These could be expanded into a separate paper and motivation may, at some point in the future, be the focus of further personal research and exploration. As is apparent, a subsequent set of instruction guidelines can be articulated to support each of these principles and enhance course design. To view a set of specific instructional guidelines related to Principle 3 see Appendix #3. In this paper, the intent so far has been to provide a brief, yet succinct summary of the three principles which inform my practice, identifying the corresponding theories which support each principle, and demonstrate that Constructivist theory underscores all aspects of my practice. Recognizing that each principle could be expanded further, as could the various theories and instructional design strategies that relate to each principle, it is evident that these three principles and their focus on interactivity, previous experience and self-directedness are fundamental to effective course design. They will now be applied to the redesign of the course "e-learning: Theory and Practice". Application As these three learning principles now guide my practice and the design of my learning spaces, I will apply these principles to what is presently a face-to-face, web-enhanced course on the effective use of learning technologies in teaching. I team-teach the course, which is by definition a constructivist process, and although both teachers have experience in the different skill areas, my particular focus is on the teaching and learning components of e-learning, with my partner's focus on the various tools available for use, generally deployed through a learning management system. We began offering this course prior to my involvement in the AU program and therefore course design has been a combined

16 effort of intuitive knowledge and skills. We believe that as faculty move to e-learning they need a pedagogical basis, a practical skill and tool set, and opportunities to begin the process of reflective practice. This course, offered over 12 weeks, was originally designed using a learning management system to support face-to-face delivery. As this represents a significant time commitment for faculty, the agenda is to move to a combination of distance and face-to-face delivery, a blended format, consisting of six classes in each format. As faculty educators we want to model effective blended delivery strategies rather than web-enhanced delivery, as this is the recommended e-learning direction for the college as it supports increased learner satisfaction and success. Although a consistent approach was already employed through the weekly, face-to-face delivery, it will be enhanced using a module structure with the learning principles as guides to the new design. The new modules will follow a formalized instructional design consisting of: 1. Clearly articulated Outcomes (Principle 1) 2. A review of previous content (Principle 2) 3. Advanced organizers for new content (Principle 1 & 2) 4. Content that is designed employing a variety of instructional strategies including presentations, graphics, interactive learning activities and feedback mechanisms such as self-tests, quizzes and online discussions. (Principles 1, 2 & 3) 5. An assessment of module learning which is required prior to advancement to the next learning module and course assessment activities. (Principle 1 & 3) 6. Course evaluation (Principle 1, 2 & 3) For details on course outcomes, learning modules and recommended changes to course design, see Appendix 4. Greater attention to the three levels of interactivity, planned use of learner previous

17 experiences and self-directedness are now strategically included in the course design as described in Appendix 4. The course assessment follows a Constructivist approach; the learner must design an effective online learning space applying the concepts studied throughout the course. These various redesign strategies follow my three principles of learning through a planned instructional design process and although many of the theories support the course design the Constructivist theory provides the overall framework for the course delivery. Conclusion Engaging learners in both thinking about content and reflecting on the learning processes is a goal of Constructivist theory and one that has been more than adequately addressed in the design of this course and specifically this assignment. As I wrestled with not only the various concepts inherent in each of the theories but also in articulating my three learning principles I learned (at least I hope I did, ) the critical content of this course while simultaneously experiencing the process of learning from a Constructivist viewpoint. As I attempted to rationalize this new content in relation to my previous experiences, explored my self-regulatory strategies and motivation for learning, new knowledge was constructed. Other theories also inherent in the completion of this learning task range from Cognitive Information Processing to Meaningful Learning and Schema Theory, Interactional Theories of Cognitive Development, and Situated Cognition. Repetition and organization of content into various forms and charts, the use of coworkers and co-learners as communities of practice, discovery learning and relevance to practice were only a few of the concepts which have played a significant role in the development of this paper. Learner interactions with content, the educator and other learners, previous experience and self-directness will no longer be random occurrences, but exist now as planned components to my course design, as will the process of engaging learners in both thinking about

18 content and simultaneously reflecting upon the learning process. These changes ultimately reflect in an improved learning space for my learners, my goal for enrolling in the Athabasca courses. In summary, "People are unlikely to change their beliefs unless prompted to reflect critically upon them". (Driscoll, p. 412) Through the processes inherent in the development and application of my personal theory of practice I have had the opportunity to reflect critically on my beliefs in light of my previous experiences and the theories studied in the course, and to construct new knowledge. As a result I have been transformed and this transformation now impacts on the various systems and communities of practice of which I am a member. Not only have I been changed through this process, the course "e-learning: Theory and Practice" has changed, and this in turn influences my co-worker, my department, new learners and the design and delivery of e-learning within the college and ultimately the students experience of the learning process. At the beginning of this paper I described the Constructivist Theory as the most influential on my practice and it appears to be not only the most influential on my practice, but far-reaching and transformative at many different levels, in many communities of practice of which I am a member. This is the true nature, within a Constructivist framework, of knowledge acquisition.

19 REFERENCES: Banathy, B. (1995). Developing a systems view of education, Educational Technology, June, pp Banathy, B., Jenlink, P. (n.d). Systems inquiry and its application in education. Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school, Washington: National Academy Press. Inc. Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Brookfield, S. (1990). The skillful teacher, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction, (3 rd ed.), Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hodges, C. (2004). Designing to motivate: Motivational techniques to incorporate in e-learning experiences. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, vol 2, 3, Winter, Retrieved November 16, 2005 from Kanuka, H., Anderson, T. (1999) Using Constructivism in Technology-mediated learning: Constructing Order out of the Chaos in Literature. Radical Pedagogy, 1(2) Kearsley, G.. (1995). The nature and value of interaction in distance learning. Distance Education Symposium 3 Instruction, May, Mayer, R.E., (1999) Designing Instruction for constructivist learning. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instruction design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp ) Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associations Spitzer, D., (1996). Motivation: The neglected factor in instructional design. Educational Technology, May/June, 45-49