El constructivismo y el conectivismo en tecnología educativa: El aprendizaje activo, situado, auténtico, experiencial y anclado

Autores/as

  • João Mattar Pontificia Universidad Católica de São Paulo / Centro Universitário Uninter

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.21.2.20055

Palabras clave:

aprendizaje, cognición, tecnología de la educación, educación a distancia.

Resumen

Este artículo teórico pretende comparar algunas teorías de aprendizaje relacionadas con el constructivismo y explorar cómo pueden usarse adecuadamente en el campo de la tecnología educativa y la educación a distancia. Después de una breve introducción, el constructivismo queda definido como una filosofía general de la educación que abarca varias teorías de aprendizaje diferentes. El artículo presenta y analiza las siguientes teorías: cognición situada, teoría de la actividad, aprendizaje experiencial, instrucción anclada y aprendizaje auténtico. El conectivismo o aprendizaje distribuido también se presenta como una nueva e importante teoría, que incluye su visión pedagógica y práctica en cursos masivos y abiertos en línea (MOOCs). Organizamos estas teorías de manera coherente bajo el paraguas constructivista e indicamos las principales similitudes y diferencias entre ellas. El conectivismo se posiciona como una nueva filosofía de la educación para la era digital, flexibilizando y ampliando el concepto de Zona de Desarrollo Próximo (ZDP) de Vygotsky para incluir el aprendizaje que se encuentra fuera del alumno, en redes sociales y herramientas tecnológicas. El texto finalmente propone un trabajo adicional sobre cómo estas teorías pueden combinarse y utilizarse adecuadamente como marcos para proyectos y actividades constructivistas en los campos de la tecnología educativa y la educación a distancia. El artículo se basa en la investigación y revisión de artículos revisados por pares sobre el constructivismo, el conectivismo, las otras teorías mencionadas y la tecnología educativa y la educación a distancia.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Citas

Anderson, T. (2016). Theories for learning with emerging technologies. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emergence and innovation in digital learning: Foundations and applications (pp. 35-64). Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 80-97.

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2012). Learning technology through three generations of technology enhanced distance education pedagogy. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-learning, 15(2).

Bardin, L. (2013). L’analyse de contenu. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Beckem, J. M., & Watkins, M. (2012). Bringing life to learning: Immersive experiential learning simulations for online and blended courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(5), 61-70.

Bedwell, W. L., Pavlas, D., Heyne, K., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2012). Toward a taxonomy linking game attributes to learning: An empirical study. Simulation & Gaming, 43(6), 729-760.

Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 98-118.

Bender, W. N. (2012). Project-based learning: Differentiating instruction for the 21st century. Corwin Press.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989, January/February). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. Retrieved from http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/museumeducation/situated.html

Clancey, W. J. (1994). Situated cognition: How representations are created and given meaning. In Lewis, R. & Mendelsohn P. (Eds.), Lessons from learning (pp. 231-242). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/661/1/133.htm

Clarà, M., & Barberà, E. (2014). Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 197-206.

Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D.C. Heath and company.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Dron, J., & Anderson, T. (2014). Teaching crowds: Learning and social media. Athabasca University Press.

Greeno, J. D. (1989, February). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44(2), 134-141. Retrieved from http://inkido.indiana.edu/syllabi/p500/greeno.pdf

Hansen, R. E. (2000, Spring). The role of experience in learning: Giving meaning and authenticity to the learning process in schools. Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 23-32. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.4.6974&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2014). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. John Wiley & Sons.

Hung, D., Looi, C.-K., & Koh, T.-S. (2004). Situated cognition and communities of practice: First-person “lived experiences” vs. third-person perspectives. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 193-200.

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student-centered learning environments. In Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 89-121). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1999). Using constructivism in technology-mediated learning: Constructing order out of the chaos in the literature. Radical Pedagogy, 1(2). Retrieved from http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue1_2/02kanuka1_2.html

Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005, January). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 17-27. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.117.357&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=22

Kasloff, P. (2011). Active Online Learning: Implementing the Case Study/Personal Portfolio Method. In K. D. Kirstein, J. M. Hinrichs, & S. G. Olswang (Eds.), Authentic Instruction and Online Delivery: Proven Practices in Higher Education (pp. 283-304). CreateSpace.

Kerr, B. (2007, February). A Challenge to Connectivism. Transcript of Keynote Speech, Online Connectivism Conference. University of Manitboa. Retrieved from http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Kerr_Presentation

Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Benjamin, W., & Hong, H. Y. (2015). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and design thinking: A framework to support ICT lesson design for 21st century learning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(3), 535-543.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Kolb, D. A. (1993). The process of experiential learning. In M. Thorpe, R. Edwards, & A. Hanson (Eds.), Culture and processes of adult learning. New York: Routledge.

Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 19-38.

Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137

Landers, R. N. (2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking

serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(6), 752-768.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mackness, J., & Bell, F. (2015). Rhizo14: A rhizomatic learning cMOOC in sunlight and in shade. Open Praxis, 7(1), 25-38.

Maina, F. W. (2004). Authentic learning: Perspectives from contemporary educators [Editorial]. Journal of Authentic Learning, 1(1), 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.oswego.edu/academics/colleges_and_departments/education/jal/vol1no1/maina.pdf

Okoli, C. (2015). A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(43), 879-910.

Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J. and Oliver, R. (2002) Authentic activities and online learning. In: HERDSA 2002 Quality Conversations, 7 - 10 July 2002, Perth, Western Australia pp. 562-567.

Scheer, A., Noweski, C., & Meinel, C. (2012). Transforming constructivist learning into action: Design thinking in education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 17(3), 8-19.

Siemens, G. (2004, December). Connectivism: A theory for the digital age. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper 105: University of Georgia IT Forum. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Siemens, G. (2012, July 25). MOOCs are really a platform. Elearnspace. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/07/25/moocs-are-really-a-platform/

Siemens, G. (2011, May 1st). Moving beyond self-directed learning: Network-directed learning. Connectivism. Retrieved from http://archive.is/tVRLa

Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: Implications for transforming distance learning. Educational Technology & Society, 3(2), 50-60. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/3_2/tam.html

The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990, August). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2-10. doi: 10.3102/0013189X019006002

The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.

The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Macmillan company.

Wilson, B. G., & Myers, K. M. (2000). Situated cognition in theoretical and practical context. In Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 57-88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Young, M. F. & Kulikowich, J. M. (1992, April 22). Anchored instruction and anchored assessment: An ecological approach to measuring situated learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, 1-21. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED354269.pdf

Publicado

2018-07-01

Cómo citar

Mattar, J. (2018). El constructivismo y el conectivismo en tecnología educativa: El aprendizaje activo, situado, auténtico, experiencial y anclado. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana De Educación a Distancia, 21(2), 201–217. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.21.2.20055