The document discusses integrating teacher-centered (objectivist) and learner-centered (constructivist) approaches to instructional design. It presents Cronje's model, which views the approaches orthogonally rather than as opposites. The document outlines characteristics of each approach based on literature, such as the teacher being the authority in objectivism and learners constructing their own knowledge in constructivism. It suggests combining approaches by considering five dimensions of learning: pre-existing and emerging information; learner engagement, processing, and application of information; and expert thinking. The goal is to capitalize on the strengths of each approach and better help learners grasp subjects.

1. INTEGRATING TEACHER-CENTERED
(OBJECTIVIST) AND LEARNERCENTERED (CONSTRUCTIVIST)
APPROACHES AND THEIR
INFLUENCES ON DESIGNING
INSTRUCTION
by
Kelly R. Elander

2. Agenda
My background
 My dissertation and theoretical backgrounds

Problems
 Cronje’s model
 The two approaches/philosophies

 Objectivist
Learning Characteristics
 Constructivist Learning Characteristics

Designing teacher- and learner-centered
combined approaches

3. Problem Issues From Research
The literature revealed that some instructional designers, course
developers, and educators were consciously breaking from accepted
theory and research-based practice in their instruction because they
felt the constructivist-only approach was inadequate to handle all
their instructional applications. (Christensen, 2008; Gilbert, 2009; Johnson, 2004, 2009;
Reigeluth, 1992; Yanchar et al., 2010)
A number of instructional designers, course developers, and educators
were pragmatically picking either an objectivist or constructivist
approach based on the needs of a particular course. (Christensen, 2008; Lan
& Sie, 2010; Pollalis & Mavrommatis, 2008; Vernadakis et al., 2011)
However, a few instructional designers, course developers, and
instructors were exploring intentionally integrating objectivist and
constructivist elements within a single course in an effort to help
learners more fully grasp the subject. (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2006; Chen,
2007; Cronjé, 2006; Johnson, 2009;Marcum, 2008; Nie & Lau, 2010; Wright, 2008)

4. Two Philosophies – Two Approaches
Teacher–Centered
John Locke, Skinner
Traditional
(Gagne, Bloom)
Objectivist
Instructivist
Learner--Centered
Jean Rousseau, John
Dewey
New Paradigm
(Piaget, Jonassen)
Constructivist
Student-Centered/
Experiential

5. Cronje’s Model
Researcher and
educator Dr. Johannes
Cronje questioned the
viewpoint that sees
objectivism &
constructivism as
opposites on a
continuum in learning or
that the “constructivistonly” approach is
always best. Cronje
chose to see the
approaches in an
orthogonal relationship
(i.e., axes at 90 degree
Cronjé’s model of the new relationship may potentially illustrate
angles to one another)
the types of instructional courses that could be formed when
forming a matrix.
integrating objectivist and constructivist approaches.

6. Cronje’s Model
Researcher and
educator Dr. Johannes
Cronje questioned the
viewpoint that sees
objectivism &
constructivism as
opposites on a
continuum in learning or
that the “constructivistonly” approach is
always best. Cronje
chose to see the
approaches in an
orthogonal relationship
(i.e., axes at 90 degree
Cronjé’s model of the new relationship may potentially illustrate
angles to one another)
the types of instructional courses that could be formed when
forming a matrix.
integrating objectivist and constructivist approaches.

7. Results Plotted on Cronje Matrix
Pilot Results
Main Study Results

8. Integrating the Approaches
This new perspective on the relationship
between objectivist and constructivist
approaches in instruction could potentially
transform current theory and address the
concerns of practitioners.
A few other researchers have started identifying
models, and frameworks to guide the
integration of these two approaches to
capitalize on the strengths of each: Antle &
Wise, 2013; Tangworakitthaworn, Gilbert, &
Wills, 2011; Yanchar, South, Williams, & Wilson,
2008.

9. Teacher-Centered Characteristics
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
Knowledge is a hierarchy of
facts, concepts, principles, and
skills.
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti, Jarke, &
Specht, 2010; Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
Hargis, 2001; Jonassen, 1991; Phillips, et al., 2007;
Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
Objective truths exist
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et al., 2010;
independent of a learner’s
Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Hargis, 2001;
understanding.
Jonassen, 1991; Phillips, et al., 2007; Yamamoto &
Kubota, 2010
The instructor is considered an
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Kang, Brian, & Ricca,
authority and expert on a subject. 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009
The instructor should be the
primary provider of information
and guidance.
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Jonassen, 1991; Kang
et al., 2010; Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010;
Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007; Puntai, 2007;
Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
The transfer of knowledge is
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et al., 2010;
primarily through one-way
Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al.,
communication from instructor to 2010; Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Kundi &
learner.
Nawaz, 2010; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010

10. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
The instructor or instructional designer
determine the sequence of topics, tasks,
activities, projects, deadlines, and exercises
to solve.
Literature Support
Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010;
Kraiger, 2008; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010;
Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007;
Puntai, 2007
The learner is primarily a passive recipient of Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Chatti et
knowledge, waiting to be filled.
al., 2010; Jonassen, 1991; Kundi &
Nawaz, 2010; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
Information is delivered by lecture,
presentation, demonstration, repetition, and
or reinforcement.
Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010;
Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007
Information is delivered without a clear
Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Puntai, 2007
understanding of a learner’s prior knowledge
of that specific subject.
Learners are motivated externally with
Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
prompts such as recognition, rewards, and
Kundi & Nawaz, 2010
punishment.

11. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
The instructor is expected to provide
instructions, prompts, and feedback
throughout the learning.
Facts, concepts, and principles are
presented in an organized, logical sequence,
or pattern that helps learners memorize the
information.
Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz,
2010; Merrill, 2009; Phillips, et al., 2007
Cooper, 1993; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
Jonassen, 1991; Merrill, 2009; Phillips,
et al., 2007; Puntai, 2007
Learners are presented information in an
Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen,
efficient, focused setting for receiving
1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Phillips, et
information such as an instructor-centered, al., 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
academic classroom, or classroom-patterned
learning environment
Instructors or instructional designers
organize and structure information content
in logical, memorable sequences, and
patterns for clear comprehension and recall.
Chatti et al., 2010; Cooper, 1993;
Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen,
1991; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Puntai,
2007; Phillips, et al., 2007; Yamamoto
& Kubota, 2010
Subjects should be presented in increments Chatti et al., 2010; Ertmer & Newby,
from simple to complex
1993; Merrill, 2009

12. Teacher-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
Instructors should provide a well-planned,
orderly, and controlled learning environment
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009;Kundi &
Nawaz, 2010
The instructor or learning designer sets
learning goals and objectives based on the
hierarchy of information in the subject matter
Ertmer & Newby, 1993; Jonassen,
1991; Phillips, et al., 2007;Puntai,
2007;Yamamoto & Kubota, 2010
Learners are expected to adopt and assimilate Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Ertmer
a conceptual knowledge set and structure
& Newby, 1993; Hargis, 2001
resembles that of the instructor or
instructional designer.
Learners process knowledge by review, study, Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Kundi &
and memorization of facts as organized by the Nawaz, 2010; Ertmer & Newby, 1993;
instructor
Hargis, 2001; Merrill, 2009
Learners is assessed by measuring learners’
attainment of predetermined objectives or
outcomes
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Ertmer
& Newby, 1993; Jonassen, 1991;
Puntai, 2007; Yamamoto & Kubota,
2010

13. Learner-Centered Characteristics
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
Knowledge is a personal understanding of
a subject formed in the mind of a learner
as a result of the learner’s exploration and
experience.
Anderson & Dron, 2011; Baviskar et al.,
2009; Cobb, 1994; Cooper, 1993;
Jonassen, 1991; Kang, Brian, & Ricca,
2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010
Truth and knowledge are personal
constructs of a learner, dependent upon
the learner.
Anderson & Dron, 2011;
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cobb, 1994;
Cooper, 1993; Fosnot,1989; Jonassen,
1991; Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz,
2010; Rovai, Ponton, & Baker, 2008
The instructor is a support and additional
source of information among many
available to the learners.
Anderson & Dron, 2011;
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Jonassen, 1991;
Kundi & Nawaz, 2010
Learners should discover, extract, or
create their own information and learning
strategies.
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cooper, 1993;
Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010;
Kundi & Nawaz, 2010

14. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
Knowledge creation occurs through Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran,
collaboration and social exchange
2009; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009;
with mentors and fellow learners.
Cobb, 1994; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill, 2009;
Rovai et al., 2008
Learners are empowered to
Anderson & Dron, 2011; Badrinarayanan, 2011;
determine their own projects, tasks, Kundi & Nawaz, 2010
activities, deadlines, and problems
to tackle.
Learners are active constructors of Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran,
their knowledge, taking the lead in
2009; Clark, 2009; Cooper, 1993; Jonassen, 1991;
investigations and inquiry.
Kang et al., 2010; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Spiro,
Coulson, Fentovich, & Anderson, 1988
Learners discover information by
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009; Baviskar et al.,
investigating or exploring
2009; Cobb, 1994; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010; Merrill,
resources with the help of peers
2009; Rovai et al., 2008
and mentors.
Learners build their own new
Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson & Miller-Cochran,
understanding based upon prior
2009; Badrinarayanan, 2011; Baviskar et al., 2009;
knowledge and experience with the Fosnot,1989; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et al., 2010;
specific subject.
Merrill, 2009

15. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
Literature Support
Learners motivate themselves internally, with
personal goals, aspirations, and concerns.
Clark, 2009; Cooper, 1993
Instructor guidance is initially provided, then
phased out as learners guide themselves.
Clark, 2009; Harasim, 2012;
Rovai et al., 2008
Learners gather knowledge from multiple forms or
representations of information, in various ways to
construct their own mental schemas.
Anderson & Dron, 2011; Anson &
Miller-Cochran, 2009; Fosnot,
1989; Jonassen, 1991; Kang et
al., 2010; Spiro et al., 1988
Opportunities are provided for learners to try tasks
in realistic or nearly realistic contexts to acquire
necessary skills under the supervision of mentors,
much like an apprenticeship.
Anderson & Dron, 2011;
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Clark,
2009; Cobb, 1994; Jonassen,
1991; Merrill, 2009
Learners build knowledge upon previous
Baviskar et al., 2009;Kang et al.,
experience and discover processes to accomplish 2010
their goals, resulting in a deeper grasp of concepts
needed to face future challenges.

16. Learner-Centered Characteristics (cont)
Learning Characteristics
Learners are provided a learner-centered
environment in which learners can access
resources in any order as they explore the
topic.
Learners are to construct their own
personalized understanding of the subject after
exploring ideas and collaborating with other
learners.
Learners set their own goals as they attempt to
tackle realistic tasks or solve problems related
to the subject matter.
Learners create meaning by reflecting upon
their own experiences, evidence, and
processes used to accomplish learning tasks.
Learning is assessed by observing the
learner’s ability to perform the authentic
thinking and tasks needed in the context.
Literature Support
Jonassen, 1991; Kundi & Nawaz,
2010
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009;
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Cobb, 1994;
Fosnot,1989; Kundi & Nawaz, 2010;
Merrill, 2009; Rovai et al., 2008
Anson & Miller-Cochran, 2009;
Cooper, 1993
Anderson & Dron, 2011; Baviskar et
al., 2009; Cooper, 1993;
Fosnot,1989; Merrill, 2009
Badrinarayanan, 2011; Duffy &
Cunningham, 1996; Kurt, 2011
Learners demonstrate knowledge by being able Badrinarayanan, 2011; Duffy &
to use the kind of thinking and processes
Cunningham, 1996; Kang et al.,
needed to accomplish a task.
2010; Kurt, 2011

17. Combining Approaches
To combine teacher- and learner-centered
approaches, consider
the requirements of five dimensions of learning:

Pre-existing and emerging information.(foundational
and central concepts)

Learner engagement with learning & information

Learner processing of the information

Learner application of the information

Expert thinking (problem-solving) use of the
information

18. Approach Used in ComM 254
Five Key
Components in
Instruction
Components Reordered
in Internet
Communication
(ComM254)
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information (foundational
and central concepts).
2. Learner engagement with learning &
information
2. Learner engagement with
learning & information
1. Pre-existing and emerging
information. (foundational & central
concepts)
3. Learner processing of the
information
4. Learner application of the
information
5. Expert thinking related to
the topic
3. Learner processing of the
information
5. Expert thinking related to the topic
4. Learner application of the

19. Approach Used in ComM 254
.
Starting with Motivation & Engagement

20. Approach Used in ComM 254
.
This first element
was handled by
sending students
a link to an
online, pre-course
survey to select
topics for the
Internet
Communication
(ComM 254)
course.

21. Approach Used in ComM 254
The teacher selects a couple of foundational
.
topics to set the stage for learner-centered
topics throughout the course.
Online
Research
Critical
Thinking

22. Approach Used in ComM 254
The typical topic will have the final assignment
instructions and an explanation of the
suggested method to tackle the topic.

23. Approach Used in ComM 254
There is a three-part approach and rubric for
each topic. The details of the approach may
differ from topic to topic.

24. Approach Used in ComM 254
After establishing the final assignment and
suggested methods, readings, articles,
Websites, videos, tools, and other materials are
provided to start the learner’s research.

25. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED
Components Reordered
in Internet
Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement
with learning & information
Blended Internet Communication
.
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners
select
the topics most relevant to their future
career
1. Pre-existing and
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
emerging
information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links,
central concepts)
videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each
3. Learner processing of
topic.
the information
3. Each topic has a discussion component
(w/
5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for
the topic
learners
4. Learner application of
to process information.

26. Approach Used in ComM 254
The discussion component may take many
forms:
• Live class discussion,
• Discussions in smaller groups,
• A class activity to collect and organize
ideas, such
as a mind map or generating lists.
• Online forums

27. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED
Components Reordered
in Internet
Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement
with learning & information
Blended Internet Communication
.
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners
select
the topics most relevant to their future
career
1. Pre-existing and
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
emerging
information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links,
central concepts)
videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each
3. Learner processing of
topic.
the information
3. Each topic has a discussion component
(w/
5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for
the topic
learners
4. Learner application of
to process information.

28. Approach Used in ComM 254
Some topics may have two discussion
sessions – one to process research findings
and then another to further analyze and classify
information learned.
The teacher often facilitates these discussions
and tries to stir critical thinking and questions.
Techniques include:
• Socratic questions
• Requests for further explanation
• Q & A following a student presentation

29. TEACHER- & LEARNER-CENTERED COMBINED
Components Reordered
in Internet
Communication
(ComM 254)
2. Learner engagement
with learning & information
Blended Internet Communication
.
(ComM 254)
2. Pre-course online survey - learners
select
the topics most relevant to their future
career
1. Pre-existing and
1. Pre-established starter topics (in critical
emerging
information.(foundational & thinking & online research), then there is a
research component (provided links,
central concepts)
videos, PPTs, materials, lecture) in each
3. Learner processing of
topic.
the information
3. Each topic has a discussion component
(w/
5. Expert thinking related to a partner, team, and/or the class) for
the topic
learners
4. Learner application of
to process information.

30. Approach Used in ComM 254
The final assignment is a project or presentation
.
designed to permit learners to show their
understanding of the topic.

31. ANY QUESTIONS?

32. REFERENCES
Antle, A.N., & Wise, A.F. (2013) Getting down to details: Using theories of cogniton and
learning to inform tangible user interface design. Interacting with Computers, 25(2),
1-20. doi:10.1093/iwc/iws007
Cronjé, J. C. (2006). Paradigms regained: Toward integrating objectivism and
constructivism in instructional design and learning sciences. Educational
Technology, Research and Development, 54(4), 387-416. doi:10.1007/s11423-0069605-1
Tangworakitthaworn, P., Gilbert, L., & Wills, G. (2011, November). Towards a Matching
Strategy of Constructivism and Instructionism. Paper submitted to the 19th
International Conference on Computers in Education, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Retrieved from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/22598/
Tangworakitthaworn, P., Gilbert, L.,& Wills, G. (2012, June). An Equivalent
Architecture of Learner's and Instructor's Knowledge through the Matching of
Intended Learning Outcome. Paper submitted to the 5th World Summit on the
Knowledge Society, Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/273230
Yanchar, S. C., South, J. B., Williams, D. D., & Wilson, B. G. (2008). How do
instructional designers use theory? A qualitative-developmental study of the
integration of theory and technology. In M. R. Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings of
selected research and development presentations (pp. 331-337). Washington DC:
Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

35. ANY QUESTIONS?

36. CRONJÉ’S MATRIX