Instructional Design

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Instructional Design by Mind Map: Instructional Design

1. for handheld devices

1.1. Classification of educational mobile applications

1.1.1. Gay, Rieger, and Bennington (2002)

1.1.1.1. productivity

1.1.1.2. communication and collaboration

1.1.2. Roschelle (2003)

1.1.2.1. classroom response systems

1.1.2.2. participatory simulations

1.1.2.3. collaborative data gathering

1.1.3. Naismith et al. (2005)

1.1.3.1. behaviourist

1.1.3.2. constructivist

1.1.3.3. situated

1.1.3.4. collaborative

1.1.3.5. informal and life-long learning

1.1.4. B. Patten et al. (2006)

1.1.4.1. collaborative

1.1.4.2. constructionist

1.1.4.3. contextual

1.2. Functional framework

1.2.1. suggested by B. Patten et al. (2006)

1.2.2. administration

1.2.2.1. concentrate on

1.2.2.1.1. scheduling

1.2.2.1.2. calendars

1.2.2.1.3. grading

1.2.2.2. example of application

1.2.2.2.1. Due Yesterday Student Organiser

1.2.2.3. pedagogical underpinning

1.2.2.3.1. little pedagogical

1.2.2.4. focuses on educational domains

1.2.2.4.1. information storage

1.2.2.4.2. information retrieval

1.2.2.5. advantage

1.2.2.5.1. useful for

1.2.2.6. limitations

1.2.2.6.1. cannot facilitate learning

1.2.2.6.2. cannot encourage learners to engage with topics

1.2.3. referential

1.2.3.1. types

1.2.3.1.1. office style tools

1.2.3.1.2. dictionaries

1.2.3.1.3. translators

1.2.3.1.4. e-books

1.2.3.2. limitations

1.2.3.2.1. not particularly educationally inspired

1.2.3.2.2. tend to replicate traditional applications

1.2.3.2.3. if the area concerned did not have access to technical resources

1.2.3.3. pedagogical underpinning

1.2.3.3.1. instructional

1.2.3.4. objective

1.2.3.4.1. support learners

1.2.4. interactive

1.2.4.1. focus

1.2.4.1.1. engage users through a 'response and feedback' approach

1.2.4.2. examples

1.2.4.2.1. Study Cards

1.2.4.2.2. Sketchy

1.2.4.3. objectives

1.2.4.3.1. elicit interactions

1.2.4.3.2. deliver appropriate feedback

1.2.4.4. features

1.2.4.4.1. can adopt various educational approaches

1.2.4.4.2. can provide valuable creative outlets

1.2.4.4.3. can support a variety of learning styles

1.2.4.5. pedagogical underpinning

1.2.4.5.1. drill and test type applications

1.2.5. microworld

1.2.5.1. limitation

1.2.5.1.1. not been widely developed for handheld devices

1.2.5.2. example

1.2.5.2.1. Carom Billiards

1.2.5.3. objective

1.2.5.3.1. encourage creation and exploration in learners

1.2.5.4. pedagogical underpinning

1.2.5.4.1. constructionist

1.2.5.5. feature

1.2.5.5.1. allow learners to construct their own knowledge

1.2.6. data collection

1.2.6.1. principle

1.2.6.1.1. record data and information about the environment using handheld devices

1.2.6.2. advantages

1.2.6.2.1. can be used to create learning experiences that are unfeasible or problematic without handheld computers

1.2.6.2.2. allow learners to access relevant content and record information at the same time

1.2.6.3. sub-categories

1.2.6.3.1. Scientific

1.2.6.3.2. Reflective

1.2.6.3.3. Multimedia

1.2.7. location aware

1.2.7.1. objective

1.2.7.1.1. contextualise learning activities

1.2.7.2. feature

1.2.7.2.1. allow handhelds to interact with the learner in a context aware manner

1.2.7.2.2. allow learners to engage with their context

1.2.7.3. examples

1.2.7.3.1. museum guides

1.2.7.3.2. augmented environments for treasure hunts

1.2.7.4. pedagogical underpinning

1.2.7.4.1. contextual

1.2.8. collaborative

1.2.8.1. objective

1.2.8.1.1. encourage knowledge sharing

1.2.8.1.2. facilitate learner collaboration

1.2.8.2. examples

1.2.8.2.1. Syllable

1.2.8.2.2. Savannah

2. using Web 2.0 technology

2.1. definition

2.1.1. By some propagators of Web 2.0

2.1.1.1. a phenomenon

2.1.1.1.1. leading to media revolution

2.1.1.1.2. giving crowds an increasingly louder voice

2.1.1.1.3. facilitating global democratization

2.1.2. By Daniel Churchill (2007)

2.1.2.1. a metaphor for a spectrum of emerging novel Internet applications

2.1.2.1.1. stimulated by

2.2. examples

2.2.1. social spaces

2.2.1.1. example

2.2.1.1.1. MySpace

2.2.1.1.2. resources sharing and referencing systems

2.2.1.2. objective

2.2.1.2.1. engage people in collective activities in such spaces

2.2.1.3. features

2.2.1.3.1. converse and exchange resources and ideas

2.2.1.3.2. have fun

2.2.1.3.3. perform actions on information and resources

2.2.1.3.4. able to learn and improve based on users' activities

2.2.2. podcasting

2.2.2.1. protocol

2.2.2.1.1. syndication feed

2.2.2.2. content

2.2.2.2.1. audio

2.2.2.2.2. video

2.2.3. Web-based publication systems

2.2.3.1. blogs

2.2.3.1.1. types

2.2.3.1.2. creators

2.2.3.1.3. product

2.2.3.2. wikis

2.2.3.2.1. creators

2.2.3.2.2. feature

2.2.3.2.3. product

2.3. characteristics of innovative applications of Internet

2.3.1. Read-Write Web

2.3.1.1. features

2.3.1.1.1. consume information

2.3.1.1.2. create information

2.3.1.1.3. contribute information to web sites

2.3.2. Subscribing to Information

2.3.2.1. processes

2.3.2.1.1. subscribe to an information service

2.3.2.1.2. information is delivered when it is available

2.3.2.2. example

2.3.2.2.1. RSS (Really Simple Syndication)

2.3.3. The Internet as a platform

2.3.3.1. role of the Internet

2.3.3.1.1. a platform that contains tools traditionally native to desktop computers

2.3.3.2. example of application

2.3.3.2.1. Google Docs

2.3.3.3. advantages

2.3.3.3.1. free for use

2.3.3.3.2. one can always access the latest version

2.3.4. Open source

2.3.4.1. design

2.3.4.1.1. hackability

2.3.4.1.2. remixability

2.3.4.2. example

2.3.4.2.1. Weather Bonk

2.4. using it in education

2.4.1. indicators

2.4.1.1. emergence of terms such as 'E-learning 2.0'

2.4.1.2. increased use of blogging in classrooms

2.4.1.3. attempts to use podcasting in teaching and learning

2.4.1.4. attempts to design learning management systems based on Web 2.0

2.4.1.5. emergence of books dedicated entirely to Web 2.0 in teaching and learning

2.4.2. applications that can be further promoted

2.4.2.1. new forms of assessment

2.4.2.1.1. example

2.4.2.2. use of Internet-mediated social learning space

2.4.2.3. use of new forms of collaborative learning

2.4.2.4. new models and methods for design of learning objects and other types of digital curriculum

2.4.2.4.1. utilize

2.4.2.5. new models for resources sharing and support for technology integration of communities of teachers

2.4.2.6. new generations of learning management systems

3. concerning the nature of mind

3.1. models of mind

3.1.1. Suggested by Cunningham (1996)

3.1.2. mind as computer

3.1.2.1. view of instruction

3.1.2.1.1. learning as information processing

3.1.2.1.2. cognitive skills approach

3.1.3. mind as brain

3.1.3.1. view of instruction

3.1.3.1.1. learning as experiential growth and pattern recognition

3.1.3.1.2. cognitive constructivist approach

3.1.4. mind as rhizome

3.1.4.1. view of instruction

3.1.4.1.1. learning as a sociocultural dialogic activity

3.1.4.1.2. social constructivist approach

3.2. Learner-centered view of collaborative technology

3.2.1. 14 basic principles

3.2.1.1. originate from

3.2.1.1.1. American Psychological Association

3.2.1.2. evolved from

3.2.1.2.1. 12 learner-centered principles

3.2.1.3. cognitive and metacognitive factors

3.2.1.3.1. nature of the learning process

3.2.1.3.2. goals of the learning process

3.2.1.3.3. construction of knowledge

3.2.1.3.4. strategic thinking

3.2.1.3.5. thinking about thinking

3.2.1.3.6. context of learning

3.2.1.4. motivational and affective factors

3.2.1.4.1. the roles that points to

3.2.1.4.2. motivational and emotional influences on learning

3.2.1.4.3. intrinsic motivation to learn

3.2.1.4.4. effects on motivation on effort

3.2.1.5. developmental and social factors

3.2.1.5.1. developmental influences on learning

3.2.1.5.2. social influences on learning

3.2.1.6. individual factor

3.2.1.6.1. individual differences in learning

3.2.1.6.2. learning and diversity

3.2.1.6.3. standards and assessments

3.2.2. challenge of using learner-centered teaching practices and technology

3.2.2.1. lack the support and direction to use collaborative technology

3.2.3. what assistances teachers need to use the 14 basic principles

3.2.3.1. identify opportunities for the use of the principles in instruction

3.2.3.2. evaluate the effectiveness of themselves

3.3. constructivist view on collaborative technology

3.3.1. problems of employing constructivism faced by practicing educators and teachers

3.3.1.1. wherewithal is not provided to reconstitute and embed constructivist ideas within their personal philosophies and teaching practices

3.3.1.2. not recognize that they operate from a constructivist paradigm

3.3.1.3. few guidelines exist for implementing and assessing constructivism

3.3.1.4. lack of time and energy

3.3.2. variations of constructivist theory

3.3.2.1. suggested by Cobb (1994)

3.3.2.1.1. cognitive constructivist

3.3.2.1.2. social constructivist

3.3.2.1.3. similarities of the viewpoints

3.3.3. technology tools

3.3.3.1. examples

3.3.3.1.1. Internet

3.3.3.1.2. Local Area Network tools

3.3.3.2. places available

3.3.3.2.1. public schools

3.3.3.2.2. universities

3.3.3.3. opportunities provided to students

3.3.3.3.1. explore personal interests

3.3.3.3.2. expand their prior experiences

3.3.3.4. enable teachers to structure learning activities

3.3.3.4.1. address student misconceptions

3.3.3.4.2. seek student elaboration of their answers

3.3.3.4.3. pose questions

3.4. sociocultural view on collaborative technology

3.4.1. Vygotskian psychology

3.4.1.1. contexts that individual mental functioning is inherently situated in

3.4.1.1.1. social interactional

3.4.1.1.2. cultural

3.4.1.1.3. institutional

3.4.1.1.4. historical

3.4.2. theories and principles for computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL)

3.4.2.1. mediation

3.4.2.1.1. artifacts in one's social environment that affect individual learning and development

3.4.2.1.2. forms of mediational tools and signs

3.4.2.2. zone of proximal development (ZPD)

3.4.2.2.1. definition

3.4.2.2.2. location where it can be formed

3.4.2.3. internalization

3.4.2.3.1. use of this process

3.4.2.4. cognitive apprenticeship

3.4.2.4.1. steps involved

3.4.2.4.2. teaching methods

3.4.2.5. assisted learning

3.4.2.5.1. nature of adept to sociocultural teaching

3.4.2.5.2. ways for teachers to assist in the learning process

3.4.2.6. teleapprenticeship

3.4.2.6.1. components

3.4.2.6.2. involves

3.4.2.7. scaffolded instruction

3.4.2.7.1. people involved

3.4.2.7.2. action involved

3.4.2.7.3. forms of support

3.4.2.7.4. results of having assistance in the standpoint of the learner

3.4.2.7.5. application

3.4.2.7.6. importance

3.4.2.8. intersubjectivity

3.4.2.8.1. definition

3.4.2.8.2. advantages

3.4.2.8.3. example type of tools

3.4.2.9. activity setting as unit of analysis

3.4.2.9.1. analysis of human activity in real settings

3.4.2.10. distributed intelligence in a learning community

3.4.2.10.1. tools

4. introduction

4.1. involves

4.1.1. wide range of skills and activities on instructions

4.1.1.1. planning

4.1.1.2. selection

4.1.1.3. preparation

4.1.1.4. presentation

4.1.1.5. evaluation

4.1.1.6. modification

4.2. definition of the field of instructional design and technology

4.2.1. categories of activities

4.2.1.1. analysis

4.2.1.2. design

4.2.1.3. development

4.2.1.4. implementation

4.2.1.5. evaluation

4.2.1.6. management

4.2.2. items being identified

4.2.2.1. research

4.2.2.2. theory

4.2.2.3. practice

4.2.3. recognize that performance technology movement has influences professional practices

4.3. cores of the field

4.3.1. use of media for instructional purposes

4.3.2. use of systematic instructional design procedures

4.4. source of decision making

4.4.1. concerning

4.4.1.1. learners

4.4.1.2. learning strategies

4.4.2. nature of knowledge

4.4.2.1. research-based

4.4.2.2. context-free

4.5. criteria of designing a solution in instructional design model

4.5.1. correctly identify the problem

4.5.2. develop materials

4.5.2.1. purposes

4.5.2.1.1. implement

4.5.2.1.2. implement to evaluate

4.6. issues considered in most models

4.6.1. students' background and characteristics

4.6.2. curriculum resources or textbooks

4.6.3. goals and objectives

4.6.4. results of analysis of previous instruction and recommendations for changes

4.6.5. media and material

4.6.6. teaching strategies or learning activities

4.6.7. tests and other assessment strategies

4.7. factors that have been ignored

4.7.1. underlying issues that designs themselves bring to their design endeavor

4.7.1.1. knowledge

4.7.1.2. assumptions

4.7.1.3. beliefs

4.7.1.4. theories of actions

4.7.2. the degree to which individuals' beliefs constrain what they will observe empirically

4.8. types

4.8.1. micro-design model

4.8.1.1. phases involved

4.8.1.1.1. analysis

4.8.1.1.2. design

4.8.1.1.3. development and implementation

4.8.1.1.4. evaluation and revision

4.8.1.2. characteristics

4.8.1.2.1. prescriptive

4.8.1.2.2. operating within clearly defined boundaries

4.8.1.2.3. aiming at stability

4.8.1.2.4. externally controlled system

4.8.2. marcodesign model

4.8.2.1. type of systems

4.8.2.1.1. societal-based

4.8.2.2. purposes

4.8.2.2.1. establish and recognize such systems of learning resources and arrangements

4.8.2.2.2. connect these systems with the learning experience in education

4.8.2.3. characteristics

4.8.2.3.1. open to changes

4.8.2.3.2. continuous and dynamic

4.8.2.3.3. participative and interactive

4.8.2.3.4. internally controlled

4.9. alias of systematic instructional design procedures

4.9.1. the systems approach

4.9.2. instructional systems design (ISD)

4.9.3. instructional development

4.9.4. instructional design

4.10. processes involved in most of the instructional design models

4.10.1. concerning the instructional problems

4.10.1.1. analysis

4.10.2. concerning the instructional procedures and materials intended to solve the problems

4.10.2.1. design

4.10.2.2. development

4.10.2.3. implementation

4.10.2.4. evaluation

4.11. reasons of not being used by teachers

4.11.1. complexity of school systems

4.11.2. lack of support for teachers when learning instructional systems design

4.11.3. impracticality of the model for practitioners

4.12. recommendations of improving existing instructional models

4.12.1. social context must become the object and source of the design

4.12.2. focus on an approach in which the design problems and strategies or solutions evolve as the designers interact with the social and cultural system and subsystems

4.12.3. people who are affected by the design should be actively participate in the decision making process

5. history

5.1. during World War II

5.1.1. people

5.1.1.1. examples

5.1.1.1.1. psychologists

5.1.1.1.2. educators

5.1.1.2. responsibilities

5.1.1.2.1. conduct research

5.1.1.2.2. develop training materials for the military services

5.1.1.2.3. assess the skills of trainees

5.1.1.2.4. select the individuals who were most likely to benefit from particular training programs

5.2. immediately after World War II

5.2.1. people involved

5.2.1.1. psychologists

5.2.1.1.1. duty

5.2.1.1.2. some of them worked in research organizations

5.3. mid-1950s to mid-1960s

5.3.1. major factor in the development of the systems approach

5.3.1.1. The programmed instruction movement

5.3.1.1.1. initiated by

5.3.2. empirical approach to solving educational problems

5.3.2.1. collect data regarding the effectiveness of the materials

5.3.2.2. identify instructional weaknesses

5.3.2.3. revise the materials accordingly

5.3.3. technology of instruction

5.3.3.1. definition

5.3.3.1.1. a small but effective self-instructional system

5.3.3.2. steps of successful construction, suggested by Heinich (1970)

5.3.3.2.1. analyse and break down contents into specific behavioral objectives

5.3.3.2.2. devise the necessary steps to achieve the objectives

5.3.3.2.3. set up procedures to try out and revise the steps

5.3.3.2.4. validate the program against attainment of the objectives

5.3.4. writing objectives

5.3.4.1. the need was recognized by Robert Mager

5.3.4.2. elements that should be included

5.3.4.2.1. a description of desired learner behaviors

5.3.4.2.2. the conditions under which the behaviors are to be performed

5.3.4.2.3. the standards by which the behaviors are to be judged

5.3.5. The criterion-referenced testing movement

5.3.5.1. early 1960s

5.3.5.2. emergence of

5.3.5.2.1. criterion-referenced testing

5.3.6. Robert Gagne

5.3.6.1. published the first edition of 'The Conditions of Learning' in 1965

5.3.6.1.1. contents

5.3.7. Michael Scriven (1967)

5.3.7.1. types of evaluation

5.3.7.1.1. formative

5.3.7.1.2. summative

5.3.8. early and mid 1960s

5.3.8.1. systematically designing instructional materials

5.3.8.1.1. concepts involved

5.4. 1970s

5.4.1. fields that used instructional design process

5.4.1.1. military

5.4.1.2. academia

5.4.1.2.1. objective

5.4.1.3. business and industry

5.4.1.3.1. objective

5.4.1.4. international arena

5.4.1.4.1. objective

5.4.1.4.2. countries involved

5.5. 1980s

5.5.1. instructional design process

5.5.1.1. fields that are still using

5.5.1.1.1. strong interest

5.5.1.1.2. had minimal impact

5.5.1.2. factor that pose a major effect

5.5.1.2.1. increasing interest of using microcomputers for instructional purposes

5.6. 1990s

5.6.1. pose significant impact on instructional design principles and practices

5.6.1.1. factors

5.6.1.1.1. performance technology movement

5.6.1.1.2. growing interest in

5.6.1.1.3. rapid growth in the use and development of

5.6.1.1.4. rapid prototyping

5.6.1.1.5. rapidly increasing interest in using the Internet

5.6.1.1.6. knowledge management

6. in digital environments

6.1. some facts about conventional instructional approaches

6.1.1. approaches of knowing learning goals

6.1.1.1. use of well-organized materials

6.1.1.1.1. sequences

6.1.1.1.2. resources

6.1.1.1.3. activities

6.1.1.1.4. methods

6.1.2. purpose

6.1.2.1. support context-specific, user-centered learning

6.1.3. speed of development

6.1.3.1. slow

6.2. resource-based learning environments (RBLEs)

6.2.1. involve

6.2.1.1. reuse of available assets to support varied learning needs

6.2.2. usage

6.2.2.1. support an individual's effort to deal with information to meet particular learning needs

6.2.2.1.1. locate

6.2.2.1.2. analyze

6.2.2.1.3. interpret

6.2.2.1.4. adapt

6.2.3. where to find such environment

6.2.3.1. diverse systems

6.2.3.1.1. features

6.2.4. components

6.2.4.1. resources

6.2.4.1.1. definition

6.2.4.1.2. processes needed to establish its contextual meaning

6.2.4.1.3. types

6.2.4.1.4. nature

6.2.4.1.5. usages

6.2.4.2. contexts

6.2.4.2.1. externally directed

6.2.4.2.2. learner generated

6.2.4.2.3. negotiated

6.2.4.3. tools

6.2.4.3.1. usages

6.2.4.3.2. types

6.2.4.4. scaffolds

6.2.4.4.1. conceptual

6.2.4.4.2. metacognitive

6.2.4.4.3. procedural

6.2.4.4.4. strategic

6.2.5. challenges

6.2.5.1. standards and conventions for creating and distributing digital resources remain inconsistent

6.2.5.1.1. reasons

6.2.5.2. the role and design of enabling contexts have not been well established

6.2.5.2.1. aspects that context is critical in the implementation of RBLEs

6.2.5.3. resource credibility, content validity and reliability are unregulated

6.2.5.3.1. ways to know the trustworthiness of source materials

6.2.5.3.2. ways to cope with this challenge

6.2.5.4. directed approaches tend to engender compliance and reliance over independent thinking

6.2.5.4.1. by-product

6.2.5.4.2. what should be provided in RBLEs

6.2.5.5. students lack sufficient metacognitive awareness and comprehension monitoring skill to make effective choices

6.2.5.5.1. skills need to engage in resource-based approaches

6.2.5.6. contemporary school accountability standards typically emphasize breadth over depth, while open-learning RBLEs emphasize depth over breadth

6.2.5.6.1. phenomenon in contemporary schools

6.2.5.6.2. method to resolve this challenge

6.2.5.7. generative learning goals require varied rather than singular learning strategies

6.2.5.7.1. reasons

6.2.5.7.2. method of handling this challenge

6.2.5.8. student-centered learning complicates identification and selection of appropriate resources

6.2.5.8.1. facts about resource selection and use for external goals

6.2.5.8.2. reasons

6.2.5.9. resources designed to support a given approach or perspective may not support different perspectives

6.2.5.9.1. reasons

6.2.5.10. RBLE may cultivate transferable skills critical for living and working in the digital era independent of the particular epistemological perspective underlying their use

6.2.5.10.1. skills that can be acquired and enhanced in the context established by RBLEs

6.2.5.11. given the ability of RBLEs to support varied epistemological perspectives, designers need to adhere to grounded practices that support individual needs and intentions

6.2.5.11.1. characteristic of RBLEs

6.2.5.11.2. actions that a designer has to do to represent the features and requirements associated with a given epistemological perspective

6.2.5.12. the process used to integrate multiple resources into a coherent learning environment has not been well established

6.2.5.12.1. reasons caused by learners and designers

6.2.5.12.2. things needed to overcome this challenge

6.2.5.13. RBLE participants lack necessary skills to access, process and use information and ideas

6.3. things that an individual should do to manage their learning or teaching

6.3.1. recognize and clarify learning needs

6.3.2. plan a strategy to address the needs

6.3.3. locate and access resources

6.3.4. evaluate the veracity and utility of the resources

6.3.5. modify approaches based on an assessment of learning progress

7. concerning technology-based learning

7.1. influence by

7.1.1. private theories

7.1.1.1. developed by teachers

7.1.1.2. sources

7.1.1.2.1. observations

7.1.1.2.2. interactions

7.1.1.2.3. instruction

7.1.1.2.4. inferences

7.1.1.2.5. teachers' prior experience and beliefs brought to the environment

7.1.1.3. difference between teachers' theories

7.1.1.3.1. in terms of

7.2. factors that affect instructional decision making and technology integration

7.2.1. learning

7.2.1.1. involves

7.2.1.1.1. knowledge and how it is acquired

7.2.1.1.2. useful teaching and learning strategies

7.2.1.1.3. ways learning can be evaluated

7.2.2. students

7.2.2.1. issues

7.2.2.1.1. ability

7.2.2.1.2. gender

7.2.2.1.3. class participation

7.2.2.1.4. self-concept

7.2.2.1.5. independence

7.2.2.1.6. social competence

7.2.2.1.7. classroom behavior

7.2.2.1.8. work habits

7.2.2.2. involves

7.2.2.2.1. how they learn

7.2.2.2.2. their limitations

7.2.2.2.3. their ability to use technology

7.2.3. teacher

7.2.3.1. involves roles in learning in different contexts

7.2.3.1.1. classroom

7.2.3.1.2. technology-based environment

7.2.4. technology

7.2.4.1. involves

7.2.4.1.1. use of technology in class

7.2.4.1.2. ways in which technology-based learning differs from classroom learning

7.2.4.1.3. limitations and benefits of technology for learning

7.2.5. institutional influences

7.2.6. knowledge of curriculum and pedagogical content

7.3. strategy for preparing individuals for the contemporary world

7.3.1. shift

7.3.1.1. from

7.3.1.1.1. direct instruction

7.3.1.2. to

7.3.1.2.1. student-centered pedagogical practices

7.4. design framework

7.4.1. properties

7.4.1.1. sensitive to the teachers' private theories

7.4.1.2. initiate reflections that leads teachers to focus on theories of learning

7.4.2. ways to maintain focus on learning

7.4.2.1. teachers

7.4.2.1.1. plan a learning task before considering any content resources

7.4.2.1.2. must be freed from instructional expectations to develop resources on their own

7.4.2.1.3. should be offered training in the facilitation of technology-based learning

7.4.2.2. students

7.4.2.2.1. should be considered in terms of their ability to successfully complete a learning task

7.4.2.3. design process

7.4.2.3.1. should be sensitive to teachers' concern about their technical skills

7.5. issues that resist changes and continuously driving teachers towards direct instruction

7.5.1. students

7.5.1.1. involve

7.5.1.1.1. private theories

7.5.2. assessment

7.5.2.1. involve

7.5.2.1.1. private theories

7.5.2.1.2. institutional influences

7.5.3. technology

7.5.3.1. involve

7.5.3.1.1. private theories

7.5.3.1.2. institutional influences

7.5.4. management

7.5.4.1. involve

7.5.4.1.1. institutional influences

8. involves theory of concepts

8.1. concepts

8.1.1. general definitions

8.1.1.1. by David H. Jonassen (2006)

8.1.1.1.1. mental representation of objects, events or other entities

8.1.1.2. by Plato

8.1.1.2.1. the essences of things

8.1.1.3. by neuroscientists

8.1.1.3.1. patterns of synaptic connections

8.1.1.4. in the aspect of psychology

8.1.1.4.1. discrete psychological phenomena

8.1.2. its role

8.1.2.1. basis for

8.1.2.1.1. meaning making

8.1.2.1.2. communication

8.1.2.2. essential in human reasoning

8.1.2.2.1. categorization

8.1.2.2.2. learning

8.1.2.2.3. memory

8.1.2.2.4. deductive inference

8.1.2.2.5. explanation

8.1.2.2.6. problem solving

8.1.2.2.7. generalization

8.1.2.2.8. analogical inference

8.1.2.2.9. language comprehension

8.1.2.2.10. language production

8.1.3. functions

8.1.3.1. enable humans to store information about categories of objects, events or entities economically

8.1.3.1.1. purpose

8.1.3.2. classification

8.1.3.3. support inferences

8.1.3.3.1. purposes

8.1.3.4. construct new, more complex concepts

8.1.3.4.1. assumption

8.1.4. current emphasis on conceptual change

8.1.4.1. meaning derives from concepts-in-use

8.1.4.2. understanding is constructed from conceptual reorganization of personal theories of the world

8.1.5. similarity views

8.1.5.1. categorized into

8.1.5.1.1. classical

8.1.5.1.2. probablistic

8.1.5.1.3. exemplar

8.1.5.2. assumptions

8.1.5.2.1. similarity between instances

8.1.5.2.2. features that determine similarity are at the same level of abstractness

8.1.5.2.3. similarity features are sufficient to describe conceptual structure

8.1.5.3. limitations

8.1.5.3.1. the meaning of a word is not inherent to the word and is not derived from the objects or events that it stands for

8.1.5.3.2. not able to account for concepts in use

8.1.5.3.3. pay no attention to the goals of the categorizer

8.1.5.3.4. lack coherence

8.1.5.3.5. not able to account for the varying functions of concepts

8.1.6. alternative views

8.1.6.1. actional

8.1.6.1.1. properties of concepts

8.1.6.1.2. definition of concepts

8.1.6.2. theory-based

8.1.6.2.1. definition

8.1.6.2.2. focuses on instruction

8.1.6.2.3. method of representing concepts

8.1.7. components of

8.1.7.1. cognition

8.1.7.2. manifesting strength

8.1.7.3. coherence

8.1.7.4. commitment to existing theories

8.2. conceptual change

8.2.1. definition

8.2.1.1. by Vosniadou (1999)

8.2.1.1.1. the cognitive process of adapting and restructuring existing theories

8.2.2. occurs

8.2.2.1. within

8.2.2.1.1. a conceptual framework

8.2.2.2. when learners change their understanding

8.2.2.2.1. the concepts they use

8.2.2.2.2. how the concepts are organized

8.2.3. depends on different types of processes

8.2.3.1. metacognitive

8.2.3.2. motivational

8.2.3.3. affective

8.2.4. types

8.2.4.1. evolutionary

8.2.4.1.1. Piagetian definition

8.2.4.2. revolutionary

8.2.4.2.1. criteria of occurence

8.2.5. involves

8.2.5.1. theory building and research

8.2.5.1.1. methods

8.2.6. implications for assessment

8.2.6.1. propositions

8.2.6.1.1. things to be assessed

8.2.6.1.2. involve

8.2.6.1.3. its role

8.2.6.1.4. criteria that should be assessed for

8.2.6.2. concepts-in-use

8.2.6.2.1. function

8.2.6.2.2. methods

8.2.7. implications for instruction

8.2.7.1. propositions

8.2.7.1.1. reasons of focusing on propositions but not links

8.2.7.1.2. factor affecting conceptual change most acutely