ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 1

David Jonassen and Constructivism

Amy W. Trainer

Towson University
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 2
Abstract. This paper begins to explore the theories of David Jonassen, a constructivist who

believed in mind tools and technology. Along with theories, the background of David Jonassens

discussed along with learning events from a 2019-2020 classroom that correlates to his theories.

David Jonassen was a unique theorist who shaped modern day education with his thoughts on

technology and change of teacher roles . He believed students should have the opportunity to

learn based on their prior knowledge and teachers should be more of a facilitator rather than a

lecturer. Students should be able to problem solve in order to gain proper knowledge of a

subject. Jonassen also created the idea of an Ask System, which would allow students and others

to use an online program to ask different questions, allowing for students to begin deeper level

thinking.

Keywords: [David Jonassen, Education, Secondary Education, Ask Systems, Mind Tools,

Constructivism]

Theorist
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 3
David Jonassen was born in New Jersey in 1947 and was most known for his theory of

constructivism including technology education and problem based learning.

The time frame of David Jonassen’s research began in the early 1970s and continued

until the 2010s, before his death in 2012.

Jonassen’s research time frame has been described as three phases (Reeves, 2013, p.

129). Phase one occurred between the seventies and eighties. This is where Jonassen made his

most significant contributions to instructional design, including theory and practice. He believed

instructional text and task analysis were an essential part of the instructional systems design (p.

129). The second phase occurred during the eighties and nineties. During this time, Jonassen was

able to “apply constructivist epistemology to learning designs and educational technology

research” (p. 129). He created the idea of using computers as cognitive or mind tools, which are

still used in today’s education world. His idea of using mind tools/cognitive tools were extremely

influential on researchers and practitioners as well. The third, and final, phase began in the late

nineties and extended to 2011. During this phase Jonassen set a standard for educational

research and development which was related to problem solving and learning (p. 129). Due to

this extensive time frame of research and writing, Jonassen’s work continues to be influential in

the education world today, creating a major legacy (p. 129).

Theory

When it comes to the theory of constructivism, learners are learning based on their own

experiences, mental structures, and beliefs (Jonassen, 1994, p. 35). The teacher takes the role of

the facilitator and should be providing students with multiple means of representation along with

focusing on construction, presenting authentic tasks, creating a real world learning environment,
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 4
allowing for reflective practice, and supporting a collaborative environment rather than a

competition type of environment (p. 35). Students are able to construct their own learning and

are not placed in a box when it comes to learning and the information that is presented to them.

In the classroom, using David Jonassen’s theory, students need to be presented with

information in a way that enhances their problem-solving skills. The three main characteristics of

problem displays are the form of information, the organization and structure, and the sequencing

of the items (Jonassen, 2003, p. 366). Researchers believe that the organization of the problems

representations have the best effect on internal representations. This would include presenting

students with diagrams or graphs to solve problems rather than using verbal representations (p.

366). Students need to be challenged and use problems that are not perfectly structured problems,

since real life is not perfectly structured, this will reinforce their learning and problem solving

skills. It will also allow the teacher to know they are learning if they are able to complete tasks

presented to the students.

Using one of David Jonassen’s tools called ‘Ask Systems’ can help students better

comprehend their tasks. Ask Systems revolves around Jonassen’s research of technology

education. The Ask System is a type of database where people can have conversations and ask

questions. An Ask System can be an interactive learning system because of the fact that asking

questions is a fundamental skill in comprehension and problem solving skills (Jonassen, 2011, p.

159). Ask Systems are also a good classroom tool for outside of the classroom. If students are

working online at home, they can use the Ask System program to help them. The systems would

also help students with their problem solving skills because. If a student cannot interpret a

problem, they have to use their problem solving skills to generate the right questions to ask.

Some sample questions would be; “Have I seen a problem like this before? What kind of
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 5
problem is this? What strategy can I use to solve this problem? How is it similar to/different

from those problems that I have solved? What lessons did I learn from solving that problem?” (p.

168). The overall purpose of an Ask System is to “guide student thinking and understanding” (p.

169). With an Ask System, students are able to have more one-on-one teaching situations and are

able to problem solve, reflect on their learning, and follow a specific procedure.

Five Learning Events

The five learning events below are lessons I have taught. All lessons have been tweaked

over the years and I continue to change them each year based on the abilities of students I have.

Learning event one revolves around a poem entitled “Where I’m From” by George Ella

Lyon. The target learning outcome is for students to be able to mimic the original “Where I’m

From” poem by creating their own, using Animoto as their primary form of presentation. I

would become the facilitator at the beginning of the lesson. I would first tap into my students

prior knowledge by asking them to use imagery words to describe their home. As a class, we

would read the “Where I’m From” poem and I would ask my students to identify the imagery

words and phrases Lyon uses to describe her home and as a class review together how those

imagery words and phrases create images in the students' brains. After reviewing as a class, the

students are given their own “Where I’m From” poem skeleton sheets to fill in. Once students

have completed their skeletons, using their own knowledge of their homes and seeing an

example of what the final product will look like, they will show their poems to me for review. I

will give the students any corrections needed before they can begin the technology piece of the

project. Students will create an online Animoto project for their poems. They must include at

least five visuals/pictures for their projects. Students who already know how to use Animoto will
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 6
be able to begin their project immediately, while students who are unsure how to use Animoto

will watch a ‘how to’ video before they begin their projects. Learning is measured when

students are asked to present their Animoto projects in front of the class. They are graded on

their abilities to mimic the original poem with their own imagery words and phrases and their

overall presentation (formal assessment). Students only share their Animoto and do not share any

other information with the class. Their classmates should be able to envision the poem from

watching the presentation.

The second learning event revolves around the novel The House on Mango Street by

Sandra Cisneros. The target outcome for this lesson is for students to make inferences about the

main character, Esperanza. For this lesson, I would ask students to write about everything they

know about their first name; history, how they got their name, whether they like their name, or if

they would want to change their name if they could. After writing about their name for about

three to five minutes, they are then given the opportunity to research their names to learn more

about the history of their names. After they have had time to reflect and research, volunteers will

share their answers. Students then will be led to reading the vignette “My Name” from the novel

The House on Mango Street. After students read this independently, they will watch a short

video of an actress playing the character and reciting the vignette. After reading and watching,

students will participate in a class discussion about the vignette. They would then be informally

assessed by making inferences about the narrator based on the vignette they read, watched, and

discussed, through an exit ticket.

The third learning event revolves around the novel The House on Mango Street by Sandra

Cisneros. The target outcome for this lesson is for students to be able to read and understand

different vignettes of the novel when the information and tasks are presented differently to them.
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 7
The students would rotate around the classroom to different stations in groups, one station would

include a station I would facilitate with the students. Station one involves students reading the

vignette “Hairs” individually. After reading, students will draw a picture of each character based

on the descriptions provided in the book. They will then draw imagery words to represent each

character and make an inference about each character based on the imagery words they have

chosen. Station two gives students the option of reading the vignette, “Sire” out loud, in pairs, or

individually. After reading, students will highlight any words or phrases that characterize Sire,

circle the name of Sire’s girlfriend, underline phrases that show Esperanza is becoming older and

more mature/curious.and answer the following questions out loud; why does Esperanza want to

know what Sire and his girlfriend do together? Station three requires the students to read the

vignetted “The First Job” as a group and then answer discussion questions as a group and need to

write their answers on their paper. The final station is the technology station and station where I

help students. Students will watch a video on the vignette “And Some More.” This is one of the

more difficult vignettes to understand, which is why it is the station where I help students. At this

station, I would facilitate a discussion for the students to help them understand the vignette

better. Once students understand the basics of the vignette, I will begin to ask them deeper level

questions about the vignette. Students would be formally assessed with a quiz about the

vignettes, along with imagery questions, close reading questions, inferene questions, and

foreshadowing questions.

The fourth learning event revolves around the novel The House on Mango Street by

Sandra Cisneros. This is the final project for this novel. The learning outcome is for students to

be able to construct Esperanza’s dream home based on the vignettes they have read and provide

evidence to support their build. By the end of studying this novel, students will have read
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 8
between ten and fifteen vignettes of the novel. Their final project involves students to construct

what they believe Esperanza’s dream home would look like. Students are allowed to create their

dream home in the following ways; construct it with any items they wish, an online structure or

3-D model, or a poster. They will use their prior knowledge of using different manipulates to

build their structures. Students will be formally assessed by writing or typing two to three

paragraphs on why their model is the perfect representation of Esperanza’s dream house using

evidence from the text.

The final learning event is based on the short story “The Most Dangerous Game.” The

learning outcome is for students to be able to identify different forms of figurative language

through identifying them in the story and providing real life examples. Students will each be

given a figurative language word that can be found in “The Most Dangerous Game.” After they

are given their word, they will find the definition of the word through using their laptops, find an

example in the text, illustrate that picture, and then write their own example from a personal

experience. Students are to write their answers on construction paper and glue the construction

paper on an unopened tissue box. Once students finish their projects, they will share with their

classmates in small groups. Students who would like to share in front of the class, will receive

extra credit. Students will be formally assessed through taking a quiz on figurative language and

being able to provide examples of the figurative language words presented.

All of these learning events relate to Jonassen’s theory because I am the facilitator in

each learning event. There is very little lecturing and students are able to explore their learning

and learn at their own pace. I also allow students to learn using their previous knowledge and

current knowledge. Finally, students are able to use computers for all of these learning events to

enhance their learning.

ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 9

References

Jonassen, D. (1994). Thinking technology: toward a constructivist design model. Educational

Technology, 34(4), 34-37. Retrieved April 30, 2020, from

www.jstor.org/stable/44428173

Jonassen, D. (2003). Using cognitive tools to represent problems. Journal of Research on

Technology in Education, 35(3), 362. https://doi-org/proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/10.

1080/15391523.2003.10782391
ISTC 663 Survey Paper #2 David Jonassen 10
Jonassen, D. (2011). Ask Systems: Interrogative access to multiple ways of thinking.

Educational Technology Research & Development, 59(1), 159–175. https://doi-org/proxy

-tu.researchport.umd.edu/10.1007/s11423-010-9179-9

Reeves, T. C., Lee, C. B., & Hung, W. (2013). Reflections on the scholarly contributions of

professor David H. Jonassen. Computers & Education, 64, 127–130. https://doi-org.

proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.013