Indicators of constructivist principles in internet-based courses

THIS STUDY set out to identify indicators of constructivist principles applied to the development of Internet-based courses. A peer-nominated panel of nationally recognized experts in constructivist learning theory and instructional technology participated in a 3-round Delphi Web survey, during which they proposed and rated categories and indicators of constructivist-compatible principles. The panel identified a total of 10 categories and 110 indicators of constructivist principles. They rated the importance of 59 of the identified indicators asM=3.51 or higher (on a 5-point Likert scale). The categories and associated indicators provide an initial framework that may help educators apply constructivist principles to the development of Internet-based courses. They also offer instructors and, in some cases, students a means to evaluate courses.

[1]  John V. Thill,et al.  Business Communication Today , 1986 .

[2]  Ronald A. Phipps,et al.  Assuring quality in distance learning a preliminary review , 1998 .

[3]  Susan M. Land,et al.  A conceptual framework for the integration of multiple perspectives with distributed learning environments , 2002, J. Comput. High. Educ..

[4]  Henry Jay Becker,et al.  Constructivist-Compatible Beliefs and Practices among U.S. Teachers. Teaching, Learning, and Computing: 1998 National Survey Report #4. , 2000 .

[5]  Rena M. Palloff,et al.  Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective Strategies for the Online Classroom. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. , 1999 .

[6]  D. Perkins.  Smart Schools: From Training Memories to Educating Minds , 1992 .

[7]  D. Jonassen,et al.  Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving , 2001 .

[8]  Stephen C. Ehrmann.  Technology's Grand Challenges. , 1999 .

[9]  Deborah L. Whetzel.  The Secretary of Labor's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. ERIC Digest. , 1992 .

[10]  M. Driscoll.  Psychology of Learning for Instruction , 1993 .

[11]  S. Condon,et al.  Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions , 1996 .

[12]  B. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1966 .

[13]  Mark Bullen,et al.  What’s the Difference: A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education by Ronald Phipps and Jamie Merisotis , 1999 .

[14]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[15]  Ronald A. Phipps,et al.  Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Education. , 2000 .

[16]  Sharon Smaldino.  Instructional design for distance education , 1999 .

[17]  R. N. Caine,et al.  Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain , 1991 .

[18]  Glenda Rakes,et al.  An Analysis of Instructional Technology Use and Constructivist Behaviors in K-12 Teachers. , 1999 .

[19]  M. E. Litzinger,et al.  Good Ideas To Foment Educational Revolution: The Role of Systemic Change in Advancing Situated Learning, Constructivism, and Feminist Pedagogy. , 1998 .

[20]  Susan P. Choy,et al.  The Condition of Education, 1999. , 1999 .

[21]  Ronald A. Phipps,et al.  What''s the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning , 1999 .

[22]  Zygmunt Scheidlinger.  Education calls for a new philosophy , 1999, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[23]  Colin Rose,et al.  Accelerated Learning for the 21ST Century , 1997 .

[24]  H. Becker,et al.  Teacher Professional Engagement and Constructivist-Compatible Computer Use , 2000 .

[25]  Margaret Riel,et al.  Research Perspectives on Network Learning , 1994 .

[26]  Judith V. Boettcher.  Distance Learning: The Shift to Interactivity , 1999 .

[27]  Peg Ertmer Victoria Walker Sunnie Lee Watson Johannes Strobel.  Educational Technology --How, When, Where?. , 1971 .