A constructivist approach for digital learning: Malaysian schools case study

Educational Technology and Society

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 149-163

  Sultan, Waleed H ^a   Woods, Peter Charles ^a   Koo, Ah Choo ^a  

^a MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Classroom; Constructivist; Environments; Learning; Process

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856873083     PISSN: 11763647     EISSN: 14364522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Abma, T., & Widdershoven, G. (2006). Moral Deliberation in Psychiatric Nursing Practice. Nursing Ethics, 13(5), 546-557.
2. Aldridge Jill, M., Barry, J. F., Peter, C. T., & Chung-Chih, C. (2000). Constructivist learning environments in a crossnational study in Taiwan and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 37.
3. Aragon, S. (2003). Creating Social Presence in Online Environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003(100), 57-68.
4. Barron, A. E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-Scale Research Study on Technology in K-12 Schools: Technology Integration as It Relates to the National Technology Standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 489-507.
5. Barron, B. (2003). When Smart Groups Fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307-359.
6. Bera, S., & Liu, M. (2006). Cognitive tools, individual differences, and group processing as mediating factors in a hypermedia environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 295-319.
7. Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2003). Learning Biology through Research Papers: A Stimulus for Question-Asking by High-School Students. Retrieved May 1, 2011 from http://www.lifescied.org/cgi/reprint/2/4/266.pdf.
8. Brooks, J. G., Brooks, M. G., & Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (1999). In Search of Understanding. The Case for Constructivist Classrooms [Revised.], Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
9. Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 203-221.
10. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically Authentic Inquiry in Schools: A Theoretical Framework for Evaluating Inquiry Tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218.
11. Chionh, Y. H., & Fraser, B. J. (2009). Classroom Environment, Achievement, Attitudes and Self-Esteem in Geography and Mathematics in Singapore. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 18(1), 29-44.
12. Churchill, G. A. (1978). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. [Madison]: Graduate School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
13. Churchill, G. A. (1999). Marketing research: methodological foundations. Fort Worth: Dryden Press.
14. Cohen, D. K. (1988). Teaching practice plus ca change. East Lansing, Mich.: Michigan State University.
15. Davis, B. M. (2006). How to teach students who don't look like you: culturally relevant teaching strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
16. Davis, D., & Cosenza, R. M. (1993). Business research for decision making. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
17. Davis, H. A. (2006). Exploring the Contexts of Relationship Quality between Middle School Students and Teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 193.
18. Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon.
19. Florio, S. E. (1978). Learning how to go to school: an ethnography of interaction in a kindergarten/first grade classroom, Harvard: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
20. Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
21. Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom Environment Instruments: Development, Validity and Applications. Learning Environments Research, 1(1), 7.
22. Gergen, K. J. (2001). Psychological science in a postmodern context. The American psychologist, 56(10), 803-813.
23. Granic, A., & Cukusic, M. (2007). Universal Design Within the Context of e-Learning. Lecture notes in computer science, 4556, 617-626.
24. Hair, J. F. (2006). Research methods for business. Chichester: John Wiley.
25. Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: a global perspective. Upper Saddle River, N.J.; London: Pearson Education.
26. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings (Vol. 103-388-996): Prentice Hall (Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
27. Hand, B., Treagust, D. F., & Vance, K. (1997). Student Perceptions of the Social Constructivist Classroom. Science Education, 81(5), 561.
28. Hanson-Smith, E. (2000). Technology-enhanced learning environments. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
29. Hase, S. (2000). Capability and coping in the new millennium: a new challenge for education. Paper presented to Universities, Colleges and Sustainable Health: a 21st Century Investment Conference, 4-6 September, Preston, UK.
30. Hase, S. K., C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Retrieved February, 7, 2010, from http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/hase1.pdf.
31. Hesse, G. (2004). Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Hung, D. (2001). Theories of Learning and Computer-Mediated Instructional Technologies. Educational Media International, 38(4), 281-287.
33. Iliff, C. H. (1994). Kolb Learning Style Inventory: a meta-analysis. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Boston University.
34. Johnson, B., & McClure, R. (2000). How are our graduates teaching? Looking at the learning environments of our graduates' classrooms. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.
35. Jonassen, D. H., & Jonassen, D. H. (2006). Modeling with technology: mindtools for conceptual change. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
36. Kelsey, K. (2007). Constructivism: strength and weakness. Retrieved July 13, 2011, from http://adulteducation.wikibook.us/index.php?title=Constructivism.
37. Kim, H.-B., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and Investigation of Constructivist Science Learning Environments in Korea. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(2), 239.
38. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
39. Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Retrieved May, 9, 2011, from http://www.psy.cmu.edu/faculty/klahr/personal/pdf/KlahrNigam.PsychSci.pdf.
40. Klahr, D. J. L. (2005). Cognitive Research and Elementary Science Instruction: From the Laboratory, to the Classroom, and Back. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(2), 217-238.
41. Kolb. (1971). Individual learning styles and the learning process. Cambridge: MIT Press.
42. Kolb. (1976). Learning style inventory: self-scoring test and interpretation booklet. Boston: McBer.
43. Kolb. (1999). Learning style inventory version 3. Boston: Hay/McBer.
44. Kolb, Boyatzis, E., & Mainemelis. (2002). Learning styles and adaptive flexibility: testing experiential learning theory. P.20. Human Resources Abstracts, 37(3), 325-472.
45. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
46. Kolb, D. A., Hay Resources, D., & Hay, G. (2007). The Kolb learning style inventory. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
47. Lin, J., & Tallman, J. (2006). A Theoretical Framework for Online Inquiry-Based Learning. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006, Orlando, Florida, USA.
48. Lund, J. L., & Tannehill, D. (2010). Standards-based physical education curriculum development. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
49. Margianti, E. S. (2001). Learning environment, mathematics achievement and student attitudes among university computing students in Indonesia. Retrieved May 1, 2011 from http://adt.curtin.edu.au/theses/available/adt-WCU20021024.095526.
50. McMahon, J. D. (2007). Teaching/learning philosophies. Retrieved July 17, 2011, from http://www.towson.edu/mcmahon/generic/philosophychart.html.
51. McNaughton, S. (2002). Meeting of minds. Wellington, N.Z.: Learning Media.
52. nd Ed.). (pp. 129-146), Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
53. Moores, T. T., & Chang, J. C. J. (2009). Self-efficacy, overconfidence, and the negative effect on subsequent performance: A field study. Information and Management, 46(2), 69-76.
54. Nikolova, N. (2007). The client-consultant relationship in professional business service firms. Klner Wiss.-Verl., Kln.
55. Nunes, M., & McPherson, M. (2003). Constructivism vs. Objectivism: Where Is Difference for Designers of e-Learning Environments? Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society, 496-500.
56. Palloff, R. M., Pratt, K., & Palloff, R. M. (2007). Building online learning communities: effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
57. Palmer, S. (2007). An evaluation of streaming digital video resources in on- and off-campus engineering management education. Computers & Education, 49(2), 297.
58. Paurelle, S. (2003). E-learning and constructivism: briefing paper, learning and teaching enhancement unit (LTEU). Retrieved May 5, 2011, from http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/support/learning-teaching-enhancement-unit/publications/FLT-briefing-notes/elearning-and-constructivism.pdf.
59. Piaget, J. (1989). Studi Sociologici: Franco Angeli, Milan.
60. Reihlen, M., & Apel, B. A. (2007). Internationalization of professional service firms as learning a constructivist approach. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18(2), 140-151.
61. Robertson, M., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2003). Knowledge Creation in Professional Service Firms: Institutional Effects. Organization Studies, 24(6), 831-857.
62. Ruble, T. L., & Stout, D. E. (1993). Learning Styles and End-User Training: An Unwarranted Leap of Faith. MIS Quarterly, 17(1), 115-118.
63. Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: an educational perspective. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.
64. Schunk, D. H. (2008). Learning theories: an educational perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
65. Scott, R., & Fisher, D. (2001). Science learning environments at the elementary school level in Brunei Darussalam. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science teaching, St Louis.
66. Selvi, K. (2007). Future Aims of Science Curriculum for Primary School. Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology, 8, 76-83.
67. Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-Grade Students' Epistemologies of Science: The Impact of School Science Experiences on Epistemological Development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 349-422.
68. Stone, J. E., & Clements, A. (1998). Research and innovation: Let the buyer beware. In R. Spillane & P. Regnier (Eds.), The superintendent of the future: strategy and action for achieving academic excellence (pp. 59-97). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
69. Taylor, J. A., & Cox, B. D. (1997). Microgenetic analysis of group-based solution of complex two-step mathematical word problems by fourth graders. Journal of the Learning Sciences 6(2), 183-226.
70. Taylor, P., & Fraser, B. (1991). Development of an instrument for assessing constructivist learning environments Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
71. Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1997). Monitoring Constructivist Classroom Learning Environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(4), 293.
72. Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & White, L. R. (1994). CLES: An instrument for monitoring the development of constructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
73. Taylor, P. C. S., Fraser, B. J., & White, L. R. (1994). A classroom environment questionnaire for science educators interested in the constructivist reform of school science. Paper presented at the In A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.
74. Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Cox, K. E., Logan, C., DiCintio, M., & Thomas, C. T. (1998). Articles - Creating Contexts for Involvement in Mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 730.
75. Turner, J. C., Midgley, C., Meyer, D. K., Gheen, M., Anderman, E. M., Kang, Y., et al. (2002). Articles - The Classroom Environment and Students' Reports of Avoidance Strategies in Mathematics: A Multimethod Study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 88.
76. van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the Load Off a Learner's Mind: Instructional Design for Complex Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5-13.
77. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Case Studies of How Students' Argumentation Relates to Their Scientific Knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.
78. von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). An Exposition of Constructivism: Why Some Like It Radical. Retrieved May 1, 2011 from http://www.oikos.org/constructivism.htm.
79. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
80. Werr, A., & Stjernberg, T. (2003). Exploring Management Consulting Firms as Knowledge Systems. Organization Studies, 24, 881-908.
81. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
82. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing Constructivism in Practice as the Negotiation of Dilemmas: An Analysis of the Conceptual, Pedagogical, Cultural, and Political Challenges Facing Teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131.
83. Woltz, D. J. (2003). Implicit Cognitive Processes as Aptitudes for Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(2), 95-104.
84. Woo, M. A., & Kimmick, J. V. (2000). Comparison of Internet versus Lecture Instructional Methods for Teaching Nursing Research. Journal of Professional Nursing, 16(3), 132-139.
85. Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 15-25.
86. Yeo, J., & Tan, S. C. (2008). Constructive use of authoritative sources in science meaning making. Paper presented at the international conference on learning sciences, Utrecht, The Netherland.
87. Yore, L. D., Anderson, J. O., & Shymansky, J. A. (2005). Sensing the Impact of Elementary School Science Reform: A Study of Stakeholder Perceptions of Implementation, Constructivist Strategies, and School-Home Collaboration. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16(1), 65-88.
88. Young, L. E., & Maxwell, B. (2007). Teaching nursing: theories and concepts. In Young, L. E., & Paterson, B. L. (Eds.), Teaching Nursing: Developing a Student-Centered Learning Environment (pp. 8-19), Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
89. Zajda, J. (2004). Cultural Transferability and Cross-Cultural Textbook Development. Education and Society, 22(1), 83-96.