The Process of Developing Theories-in-Action with OELEs: A Qualitative Study.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Process of Developing Theories-in-Action with OELEs: A Qualitative Study. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Land, Susan M., Hannafin, Michael J. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 11 |
| Publication Date: | 1996 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Cognitive Processes, Courseware, Decision Making, Educational Technology, Feedback, Grade 7, Hypothesis Testing, Junior High Schools, Learning Processes, Learning Theories, Microworlds, Science Instruction, Technology Integration |
| Abstract: | Open-ended learning environments (OELEs) like microworlds have been touted as one approach for blending learning theory and emerging technology to support the building of student-centered understanding. The learning process involves developing a theory-in-action--an intuitive theory that is generated and changed by learners as they reflect upon experiences that either confirm or challenge the validity of the theory. The purpose of this study was to investigate how theories-in-action develop in collaboration with open-ended learning environments. The study examined the following questions: (1) What processes are used by learners to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (perception, organization, integration); (2) What intentions are used by learners to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (unsystematic searches, goal-based intentions, means-based intentions); and (3) How do learners use system features to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (awareness of features vs. awareness of how to use them to accomplish goals or test a hypothesis). Participants were four seventh-grade students drawn from a general science class. Findings were organized according to an analysis of system-based events, learner processing of events, and learner intentions for action. Results indicate that the process of developing theories-in-action in conjunction with OELEs appears to center around three primary areas: decisions about how to use the system; processing of system-generated feedback; and intentions for further action. The more closely linked these three components, the more likely a theory-in-action will develop and evolve. Further discussion focuses on over-reliance on visual cues and on the discovery of a situated learning paradox. (Contains 15 references.) (AEF) |
| Entry Date: | 1996 |
| Accession Number: | ED397809 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Open-ended learning environments (OELEs) like microworlds have been touted as one approach for blending learning theory and emerging technology to support the building of student-centered understanding. The learning process involves developing a theory-in-action--an intuitive theory that is generated and changed by learners as they reflect upon experiences that either confirm or challenge the validity of the theory. The purpose of this study was to investigate how theories-in-action develop in collaboration with open-ended learning environments. The study examined the following questions: (1) What processes are used by learners to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (perception, organization, integration); (2) What intentions are used by learners to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (unsystematic searches, goal-based intentions, means-based intentions); and (3) How do learners use system features to build and/or evolve a theory-in-action? (awareness of features vs. awareness of how to use them to accomplish goals or test a hypothesis). Participants were four seventh-grade students drawn from a general science class. Findings were organized according to an analysis of system-based events, learner processing of events, and learner intentions for action. Results indicate that the process of developing theories-in-action in conjunction with OELEs appears to center around three primary areas: decisions about how to use the system; processing of system-generated feedback; and intentions for further action. The more closely linked these three components, the more likely a theory-in-action will develop and evolve. Further discussion focuses on over-reliance on visual cues and on the discovery of a situated learning paradox. (Contains 15 references.) (AEF) |
|---|
