Samenvatting IDE
Byrnes ‘92
Categorizing and combining theories of cognitive development and learning (springer.com)
In this article the centrality of meta-theoretical belief systems (MTBSs) for theories of cognitive
development is considered. MTBSs guide and constrain the construction of theoretical models and
developmental mechanisms. Can be effectively used to categorize theories and to combine to form
larger, comprehensive theories.
MTBSs: meta-theoretical belief systems – form the core of a theory. Designed to compare meanings
in different theories. Philosophies that theorists adhere to which
- Prompt them to investigate certain types of phenomena and avoid others
- Specify the nature of knowledge
- Specify the origin of knowledge
Reason to use meta-theoretical belief systems
The value of any categorization scheme, is that the similarities and differences among the individuals
grouped by this scheme are highlighted. A more adequate scheme would provide more information
regarding similarities and differences. To illustrate why MTBSs were used to categorize theories,
consider that theories can be similar at a number of levels of analysis including:
- the phenomenon level: two theorists could study the same phenomenon (e.g., Byrnes
conservation of mass)
- the theory level: two theorists could advocate the same theory (e.g., Piaget's theory)
- the subdivision level: two theorists could be part of the same subdivision of a science
(e.g., cognition and learning)
- the science level: two theorists could be part of the same science (e.g., psychology)
Nature of theories
Characteristics of theories:
1. consist of a network of interrelated concepts/constructs
2. make specific ontological distinctions
3. explains sets of phenomena
4. predictive function
5. differentiation between the theory's constructs, models, and beliefs
and the evidence that can be used to support them
,Meta-theoretical belief systems
Behaviorism - behaviorists can differ with respect to their stance on the reality, role, and nature of
mental representation. In addition, behaviorists can differ with respect to the precise details of the
models that they use to explain "within-time" changes in behavior.
Neo-behaviorism - some neo-behaviorists placed a relatively equal emphasis on behavioral and
cognitive explanations, they would fall near the midpoint of the continuum.
Cognitivism - cognitivists do not believe that stimuli are the primary causes of behavior because the
effect of a stimulus is thought to be totally a function of how it is interpreted by cognitive processes
Structuralism - in order to avoid unnecessary overlap among categories, it is necessary to make a
distinction between those who provide structural descriptions of some phenomena, and the school
of structuralism. Structuralists consider it important to analyze the nature and organization of
concepts. Describe the nature of knowledge in terms of conceptual knowledge.
Functionalism - it is necessary to distinguish between those who provide functional descriptions of
some phenomena, and the school of functionalism. Functionalists consider it important to study
either one of two things: procedural knowledge or processing aspects of cognition. As the name
implies, such theorists focus on how the mind operates in the course of problem-solving, processing
information, and so forth. Describe the nature of knowledge in terms of procedural knowledge.
To illustrate the contrast between the foci of structuralists and functionalists, one can argue that
whereas a structuralist studies the organization of conceptual knowledge already in semantic
memory, a functionalist studies such things as how the mind encodes incoming stimuli, how the mind
retrieves information from memory, or how a subject uses mnemonic strategies within recall tasks.
Nativism – all knowledge is innate.
Empiricism - most knowledge is acquired through exposure to the world. The individual possesses no
a priori knowledge, concepts, or rules.
Constructivism - the essence of constructivism is the belief that a given concept is neither innate nor
immediately acquired through exposure to the world. Rather, it is progressively created or invented
by the individual.
As with nativists and empiricists, constructivists could differ regarding within-time models (e.g.,
concrete operations vs. some other model) and developmental mechanisms (e.g., equilibration vs.
some other mechanism).
,The present approach is novel in two respects:
1. it is rare and unpopular to argue that theories can and should be combined. In most prior
accounts, the claim is made that contemporary theories are essentially irreconcilable.
2. the present approach is the first to use multiple continua and to characterize theories as
being coordinates in three-dimensional space.
Hew et al. ‘19
Where is the “theory” within the field of educational technology research?
(researchgate.net)
The present paper examines how explicitly existing theory was identified in previous research, how
theories were applied and how often these theories were advanced in education technology research.
In the majority of cases, explicit engagement with theory was absent. Many studies either were
wholly bereft of theories or made vague use of theory. Where theory was explicit, the articles were
more likely to use theory to conceptualize the research, to inform the data collection or analysis
process and to discuss the results. Very few articles reported findings that help us to learn something
new about a particular theory.
The field of educational technology research is often characterized by critics as methodologically
weak and under-theorized (lack of existing theory to frame or inform an empirical research study).
Most research on educational technology research focuses on “matters of practical implementation
and design, largely driven by ‘common sense’ assumptions about what technology can achieve”, but
pays scant attention to existing theories that might be used to frame and inform research.
The use of theory is imperative to enhancing our understanding of a certain phenomenon or
element:
1. theory provides a useful basis to describe, explain and predict the phenomena it relates to
2. studies that utilize a theory and then show refinements to the theory are usually considered
exemplars of high-quality research
3. the use of theory can increase a researcher’s success of generalizing the findings to other
contexts
, Explanatory theories: usually describe the factors or reasons affecting a phenomenon, such as a
human behavior. Explanatory theory explains why phenomena are the way they are.
Design theories: concerned with how things should be designed to achieve certain goals. Design
theory helps people create something.
Implications for educational technology research:
1. researchers in the field of educational technology are encouraged to develop more “middle-
range theories”, that can both explain empirical findings in a concrete way and demonstrate
the ability to frame a variety of research topics in the field to
conceptualize the research design, inform data manipulation
and interpret the results
2. researchers should be more explicit about the theories that
underpin their studies. Explicit theoretical engagement can
expand the research to a broader level, helping us better
understand the reasons and mechanisms behind the
phenomenon.
Margaryan et al. ’15
Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) - ScienceDirect
This paper presents an analysis of instructional design quality of 76 randomly selected Massive Open
Online Courses (MOOCs). The quality of MOOCs was determined from first principles of instruction,
using a course survey instrument. Two types of MOOCs (xMOOCs and cMOOCs) were analyzed and
their instructional design quality was assessed and compared. The majority of MOOCs scored poorly
on most instructional design principles. However, most MOOCs scored highly on organization and
presentation of course material. The results indicate that although most MOOCs are well-packaged,
their instructional design quality is low.
MOOCs: Massive Open Online Courses - a new form of online learning. Unlike the original
connectivist MOOCs (cMOOCs), more recent MOOCs were hyper-centralized, content-based, and
linear. They typically focused around a set of short, modularized video-lectures, followed by
automated, multiple-choice testing of learners' understanding of the content (xMOOCs).
There has been no systematic analysis of the quality of instruction in MOOCs. The instructional
design quality of a course is a critical indicator and prerequisite of the potential of the course for
effective learning. Instructional design is a key component of the overall quality and pedagogic
effectiveness of a learning experience.
Assessment of design quality of MOOCs using Principles of Instruction focus on learning activities:
1. problem-centered: learning is promoted when learners acquire skill in the context of real-world
problems. Instructional effectiveness of a course will be enhanced if the learning activities in the
course give learners an opportunity to solve real-world problems, working through a progression of
interrelated tasks, from the least difficult to the most difficult, that reflect the complexity of real-
world settings.
2. activation: learning is promoted when learners activate existing knowledge and skill as a
foundation for new skill. Activation also requires learning activities that stimulate the development of
the mental models and schemes that can help learners to incorporate the new knowledge or skill
into their existing knowledge.
3. demonstration: learning is promoted when learners observe a demonstration of the skill to be
learned. Importance of showing learners what they could do to apply the new information or skill in
new situations rather than merely presenting them information about what to do.
Byrnes ‘92
Categorizing and combining theories of cognitive development and learning (springer.com)
In this article the centrality of meta-theoretical belief systems (MTBSs) for theories of cognitive
development is considered. MTBSs guide and constrain the construction of theoretical models and
developmental mechanisms. Can be effectively used to categorize theories and to combine to form
larger, comprehensive theories.
MTBSs: meta-theoretical belief systems – form the core of a theory. Designed to compare meanings
in different theories. Philosophies that theorists adhere to which
- Prompt them to investigate certain types of phenomena and avoid others
- Specify the nature of knowledge
- Specify the origin of knowledge
Reason to use meta-theoretical belief systems
The value of any categorization scheme, is that the similarities and differences among the individuals
grouped by this scheme are highlighted. A more adequate scheme would provide more information
regarding similarities and differences. To illustrate why MTBSs were used to categorize theories,
consider that theories can be similar at a number of levels of analysis including:
- the phenomenon level: two theorists could study the same phenomenon (e.g., Byrnes
conservation of mass)
- the theory level: two theorists could advocate the same theory (e.g., Piaget's theory)
- the subdivision level: two theorists could be part of the same subdivision of a science
(e.g., cognition and learning)
- the science level: two theorists could be part of the same science (e.g., psychology)
Nature of theories
Characteristics of theories:
1. consist of a network of interrelated concepts/constructs
2. make specific ontological distinctions
3. explains sets of phenomena
4. predictive function
5. differentiation between the theory's constructs, models, and beliefs
and the evidence that can be used to support them
,Meta-theoretical belief systems
Behaviorism - behaviorists can differ with respect to their stance on the reality, role, and nature of
mental representation. In addition, behaviorists can differ with respect to the precise details of the
models that they use to explain "within-time" changes in behavior.
Neo-behaviorism - some neo-behaviorists placed a relatively equal emphasis on behavioral and
cognitive explanations, they would fall near the midpoint of the continuum.
Cognitivism - cognitivists do not believe that stimuli are the primary causes of behavior because the
effect of a stimulus is thought to be totally a function of how it is interpreted by cognitive processes
Structuralism - in order to avoid unnecessary overlap among categories, it is necessary to make a
distinction between those who provide structural descriptions of some phenomena, and the school
of structuralism. Structuralists consider it important to analyze the nature and organization of
concepts. Describe the nature of knowledge in terms of conceptual knowledge.
Functionalism - it is necessary to distinguish between those who provide functional descriptions of
some phenomena, and the school of functionalism. Functionalists consider it important to study
either one of two things: procedural knowledge or processing aspects of cognition. As the name
implies, such theorists focus on how the mind operates in the course of problem-solving, processing
information, and so forth. Describe the nature of knowledge in terms of procedural knowledge.
To illustrate the contrast between the foci of structuralists and functionalists, one can argue that
whereas a structuralist studies the organization of conceptual knowledge already in semantic
memory, a functionalist studies such things as how the mind encodes incoming stimuli, how the mind
retrieves information from memory, or how a subject uses mnemonic strategies within recall tasks.
Nativism – all knowledge is innate.
Empiricism - most knowledge is acquired through exposure to the world. The individual possesses no
a priori knowledge, concepts, or rules.
Constructivism - the essence of constructivism is the belief that a given concept is neither innate nor
immediately acquired through exposure to the world. Rather, it is progressively created or invented
by the individual.
As with nativists and empiricists, constructivists could differ regarding within-time models (e.g.,
concrete operations vs. some other model) and developmental mechanisms (e.g., equilibration vs.
some other mechanism).
,The present approach is novel in two respects:
1. it is rare and unpopular to argue that theories can and should be combined. In most prior
accounts, the claim is made that contemporary theories are essentially irreconcilable.
2. the present approach is the first to use multiple continua and to characterize theories as
being coordinates in three-dimensional space.
Hew et al. ‘19
Where is the “theory” within the field of educational technology research?
(researchgate.net)
The present paper examines how explicitly existing theory was identified in previous research, how
theories were applied and how often these theories were advanced in education technology research.
In the majority of cases, explicit engagement with theory was absent. Many studies either were
wholly bereft of theories or made vague use of theory. Where theory was explicit, the articles were
more likely to use theory to conceptualize the research, to inform the data collection or analysis
process and to discuss the results. Very few articles reported findings that help us to learn something
new about a particular theory.
The field of educational technology research is often characterized by critics as methodologically
weak and under-theorized (lack of existing theory to frame or inform an empirical research study).
Most research on educational technology research focuses on “matters of practical implementation
and design, largely driven by ‘common sense’ assumptions about what technology can achieve”, but
pays scant attention to existing theories that might be used to frame and inform research.
The use of theory is imperative to enhancing our understanding of a certain phenomenon or
element:
1. theory provides a useful basis to describe, explain and predict the phenomena it relates to
2. studies that utilize a theory and then show refinements to the theory are usually considered
exemplars of high-quality research
3. the use of theory can increase a researcher’s success of generalizing the findings to other
contexts
, Explanatory theories: usually describe the factors or reasons affecting a phenomenon, such as a
human behavior. Explanatory theory explains why phenomena are the way they are.
Design theories: concerned with how things should be designed to achieve certain goals. Design
theory helps people create something.
Implications for educational technology research:
1. researchers in the field of educational technology are encouraged to develop more “middle-
range theories”, that can both explain empirical findings in a concrete way and demonstrate
the ability to frame a variety of research topics in the field to
conceptualize the research design, inform data manipulation
and interpret the results
2. researchers should be more explicit about the theories that
underpin their studies. Explicit theoretical engagement can
expand the research to a broader level, helping us better
understand the reasons and mechanisms behind the
phenomenon.
Margaryan et al. ’15
Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) - ScienceDirect
This paper presents an analysis of instructional design quality of 76 randomly selected Massive Open
Online Courses (MOOCs). The quality of MOOCs was determined from first principles of instruction,
using a course survey instrument. Two types of MOOCs (xMOOCs and cMOOCs) were analyzed and
their instructional design quality was assessed and compared. The majority of MOOCs scored poorly
on most instructional design principles. However, most MOOCs scored highly on organization and
presentation of course material. The results indicate that although most MOOCs are well-packaged,
their instructional design quality is low.
MOOCs: Massive Open Online Courses - a new form of online learning. Unlike the original
connectivist MOOCs (cMOOCs), more recent MOOCs were hyper-centralized, content-based, and
linear. They typically focused around a set of short, modularized video-lectures, followed by
automated, multiple-choice testing of learners' understanding of the content (xMOOCs).
There has been no systematic analysis of the quality of instruction in MOOCs. The instructional
design quality of a course is a critical indicator and prerequisite of the potential of the course for
effective learning. Instructional design is a key component of the overall quality and pedagogic
effectiveness of a learning experience.
Assessment of design quality of MOOCs using Principles of Instruction focus on learning activities:
1. problem-centered: learning is promoted when learners acquire skill in the context of real-world
problems. Instructional effectiveness of a course will be enhanced if the learning activities in the
course give learners an opportunity to solve real-world problems, working through a progression of
interrelated tasks, from the least difficult to the most difficult, that reflect the complexity of real-
world settings.
2. activation: learning is promoted when learners activate existing knowledge and skill as a
foundation for new skill. Activation also requires learning activities that stimulate the development of
the mental models and schemes that can help learners to incorporate the new knowledge or skill
into their existing knowledge.
3. demonstration: learning is promoted when learners observe a demonstration of the skill to be
learned. Importance of showing learners what they could do to apply the new information or skill in
new situations rather than merely presenting them information about what to do.
