You are here:

Teaching, Learning and ICT/Ed Tech in Schools: Is Communal Constructivism the Best Approach?
PROCEEDINGS

, Independent researcher, United Kingdom ; , Florida Atlantic University, United States

AACE Award

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-47-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Identification and acceptance of a best approach to teaching and learning with information technologies in teacher preparation programs is under constant investigation as the integration of new technologies becomes an impressive force in education today. Determining positive and valuable features of any practical and theoretical teaching and learning approach from a logical and systematic review is essential. This paper will explore social and communal constructivism to identify the potential strengths and weaknesses and to address their relationship and the implications for teacher education from the authors' international point of view. Additionally the authors argue that communal constructivism might be best seen as not a single idea, but a loosely related set of separate innovations.

Citation

Scrimshaw, P. & Weber, R. (2003). Teaching, Learning and ICT/Ed Tech in Schools: Is Communal Constructivism the Best Approach?. In C. Crawford, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2003--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2497-2501). Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 14, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Becker, H., & Reil, M. (1999, April). Teacher professionalism, schoolwork culture, and the emergence of constructivistcompatible pedagogies. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Montreal, Canada.
  2. Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  3. Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F.E. Weinert and R.H. Kluwe, (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp.65-116). Hilsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
  4. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
  5. Gallini,J., & Barron, D. (2001). Participants’ perception of Web-infused environments: A survey of teaching beliefs, learning approaches, and communication. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), pp 139-157.
  6. Gallini, J., & Zhang, Y. (1997). Socio-cognitive constructs and characteristics of classroom communities: An explorationof relationships. Jounal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 321-339.
  7. Holmes, B., Tangney, B., Fitzgibbon, A., Savage, T., & Mehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: students constructing learning for as well as with others. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference Proceedings, March, Orlando, FL, 2001, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Charlottesville, VA.
  8. Jonassen, D., & Reves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D.H. Jonassen ED.), Handbook ofRresearch for Educational Communications and Technology New York:Macmillan. (pp. 193-719).
  9. Leask, M., Ramos, J-L., & Younie, S. (2001). Communal Constructivist Theory: Information and communications technology pedagogy and internationalisation of the curriculum. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10, pp. 117-134.
  10. OECD (2001) What Schools for the Future? (Paris, OECD).
  11. Ornstein, A. & Hunkins, F. (1997). Curriculum :Foundations, Principles, and Issues. Pearson Education.
  12. Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension Fostering and comprehension Monitoring activities. Cognitive and Instruction. 1(2), pp. 117-175.
  13. Wood, D. (2002). The THINK Project (Brussels, European Schoolnet).

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.