THEORIES AND RRL

Constructivism Theory of Learning Explained

Constructivism is basically a theory which is based on observation and scientific study, about how
people learn. It says that people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world,
through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences (Bereiter, 1994). When we encounter
something new, we have to reconcile it with our previous ideas and experience, maybe changing what
we believe, or maybe discarding the new information as irrelevant. In any case, we are active creators of
our own knowledge. To do this, we must ask questions, explore, and assess what we know.In the
classroom, the constructivist view of learning can point towards a number of different teaching
practices. In the most general sense, it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques
(experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk
about what they are doing and h ow their understanding is changing. The teacher makes sure he/she
understands the students' preexisting conceptions, and guides the activity to address them and then
build on them (Oliver, 2000). Constructivism has roots in philosophy, psychology, sociology, and
education. But while it is important for educators to understand constructivism, it is equally important
to understand the implications this view of learning has for teaching and teacher professional
development (Tam, 2000).Constructivism's central idea is that human learning is constructed,
thatlearners build new knowledge upon the foundation of previous learning. This viewof learning
sharply contrasts with one in which learning is the passive transmission of information from one
individual to another, a view in which reception, not construction, is key.Two important notions orbit
around the simple idea of constructed knowledge.Thefirst is that learners construct new understandings
using what they alreadyknow.There is no tabula rasa on which new knowledge is etched. Rather,
learners come to learning situations with knowledge gained from previous experience, and that prior
knowledge influences what new or modified knowledge they will construct from new learning
experiences (Phillips, 1995). The second notion is that learning is active rather than passive. Learners
confront their understanding in light of what they encounter in the new learning situation. If what
learners encounter is inconsistent with their current understanding, their understanding can change to
accommodate new experience. Learners remain active throughout this process: they apply current
understandings, note relevant elements in new learning experiences, judge the consistency of prior and
emerging knowledge, and based on that judgment, they can modify knowledge (Phillips, 1995).
According to Driscoll (2000), constructivism learning theory is a philosophy which enhances students'
logical and conceptual growth. The underlying concept within the constructivism learning theory is t he
role which experiences-or connections with the adjoining atmosphere-play in student education.The
constructivism learning theory argues that people produce knowledge and form meaning based upon
their experiences. Two of the key concepts within the constructivism learning theory which create the
construction of an individual's new knowledge are accommodation and assimilation. Assimilating causes
an individual to incorporate new experiences into the old experiences. This causes the individual to
develop new outlooks, rethink what were once misunderstandings, and evaluate what is important,
ultimately altering their perceptions. Accommodation, on the other hand, is reframing the world and
new experiences into the mental capacity already present. Individuals conceive a particular fashion in
which the world operates. When things do not operate within that context, they must accommodate
and reframing the expectations with the outcomes. Constructivism is often compared to objectivism,
which is usually quoted as b eing the counter point or direct opposite of constructivism. Much of
objectivist theory is based on the work of behaviorists such as Skinner (1953.) Objectivists believe that
information itself is knowable outside the bounds of any human mind, and that any individual
interpretation of knowledge can be said to be either correct or incorrect. Objectivists view individual
pieces of information as symbols or currency that can be acquired by humans, and can be transferred
from human to human should the correct learning conditions exist. (Jonassen, 1991) While much of the
early work in formal instructional design derived from objectivist theory, modern academic minds have
come to accept that learning environments which more closely match the needs of constructivist
learning may be more effective. The perceived benefits of constructivist learning may be particularly
valuable where the teaching of complex skills, such as problem solving or critical thinking skills are
concerned (Tam, 2000.) If we accept that constructivist theory is the best way to define learning, then it
follows that in order to promote student learning it is necessary to create learning environments that
directly expose the learner to the material being studied. For only by experiencing the world directly can
the learner derive meaning from them. This gives rise to the view that constructivist learning must take
place within a suitable construct ivist learning environment. One of the central tenants of all
constructivist learning is that it has to be an active process (Tam, 2000); therefore, any constructivist
learning environment must provide the opportunity for active learning.

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)

- started as the Theory of Reasoned Action in 1980 to predict an individual's intention to

The TPB has been used successfully to predict and explain a wide range of health behaviors
and intentions including smoking, drinking, health services utilization, breastfeeding, and
substance use, among others. The TPB states that behavioral achievement depends on both
motivation (intention) and ability (behavioral control). It distinguishes between three types of
beliefs - behavioral, normative, and control. The TPB is comprised of six constructs that
collectively represent a person's actual control over the behavior.

1. Attitudes - This refers to the degree to which a person has a favorable or unfavorable
evaluation of the behavior of interest. It entails a consideration of the outcomes of
performing the behavior.
2. Behavioral intention - This refers to the motivational factors that influence a given
behavior where the stronger the intention to perform the behavior, the more likely the
behavior will be performed.
3. Subjective norms - This refers to the belief about whether most people approve or
disapprove of the behavior. It relates to a person's beliefs about whether peers and
people of importance to the person think he or she should engage in the behavior.
4. Social norms - This refers to the customary codes of behavior in a group or people or
larger cultural context. Social norms are considered normative, or standard, in a group of
people.
 5. Perceived power - This refers to the perceived presence of factors that may facilitate or
impede performance of a behavior. Perceived power contributes to a person's perceived
behavioral control over each of those factors.
6. Perceived behavioral control - This refers to a person's perception of the ease or
difficulty of performing the behavior of interest. Perceived behavioral control varies
across situations and actions, which results in a person having varying perceptions of
behavioral control depending on the situation. This construct of the theory was added
later, and created the shift from the Theory of Reasoned Action to the Theory of Planned
Behavior.

RRL

Too much face and not enough books: The

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026Get rights and content

Abstract
Because of the social media platform’s widespread adoption by college students, there
is a great deal of interest in how Facebook use is related to academic performance. A
small number of prior studies have examined the relationship between Facebook use
and college grade point average (GPA); however, these studies have been limited by
their measures, sampling designs and failure to include prior academic ability as a
control variable. For instance, previous studies used non-continuous measures of time
spent on Facebook and self-reported GPA. This paper fills a gap in the literature by
using a large sample (N = 1839) of college students to examine the relationship among
multiple measures of frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities,
and time spent preparing for class and actual overall GPA. Hierarchical (blocked)
linear regression analyses revealed that time spent on Facebook was strongly and
significantly negatively related to overall GPA, while only weakly related to time
spent preparing for class. Furthermore, using Facebook for collecting and sharing
information was positively predictive of the outcome variables while using Facebook
for socializing was negatively predictive.