نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی تربیتی، پردیس بین‌المللی کیش، دانشگاه تهران، ایران

2 استاد، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، ایران

چکیده

پژوهش حاضر با هدف تدوین و اعتباریابی الگوی آموزشی مبتنی بر نظریه یادگیری سازنده گرایی انجام شد. این پژوهش یک مطالعه کیفی می باشد که از روش تحلیل محتوای Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) بهره جسته است. شرکت کنندگان این پژوهش را 22 نفر از متخصصان موضوعی تشکیل می داد که به صورت روش نمونه گیری هدفمند انتخاب شدند. استراتژی انتخاب این محققان بر اساس میزان ارتباط مقالات و پژوهش های چاپ شده این محققان در راستای موضوع تحقیق بود. یعنی محققانی انتخاب شدند که بیشترین ارتباط را از لحاظ نظری و پژوهشی با موضوع داشتند. قاعده اشباع نظری هم به عنوان مبنای تعیین تعداد شرکت کنندگان پژوهش تعیین شد. تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها در سه مرحله کدگذاری باز، کدگذاری محوری و کدگذاری انتخابی انجام شد. نرم افزار مورد استفاده برای تحلیل MAXQDA2018 بوده است. روایی یافته ها بر اساس مؤلفه روایی محتوا (CVI) و پایایی یافته ها بر اساس آزمون ضریب کاپا مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. یافته های این پژوهش منجر به شناسایی ده مؤلفه شد که عبارت بودند از: موضوع، مشارکت، یادگیرنده محوری، فعال سازی، بافت یادگیری، پشتیبانی، دانش و تجربه، ارائه، کاربست و ارزشیابی که در کنار هم الگوی آموزشی مبتنی بر سازنده گرایی را تشکیل می دهند. بر اساس یافته های پژوهش، پیشنهاد می شود از الگوی حاضر به منظور افزایش میزان مشارکت و تعامل دانش آموزان در کلاس درس استفاده شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Developing and validating an educational model based on Constructivism learning theory

نویسندگان [English]

  • mozhgan fereydoun nezhad 1
  • Afrooz Gholamali 2
  • masoud gholam ali lavasani 3

1 Ph.D. Student Educational Psychology Kish International Campus, University of Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Introduction
Effective educational models must properly observe the needs of the new age and be based on scientific theories. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an educational model with constructivism learning theory.
Method
This research is a qualitative study that uses the method of content analysis by Brown and Clark (2006). The participants of this study were 22 experts on the subject who were selected by purposive sampling method.
The strategy of selecting these researchers was based on the relevance of their published articles in line with this research topic. In other words, only those researchers were selected who had the most theoretical relevance and research background on the subject. The rule of theoretical saturation was also used as the basis to determine the number of participants.
Instruments
Data analysis was performed in three stages of open coding, axial coding and selective coding. MAXQDA 2018 software was use for data analysis. The validity of the findings was assessed based on content validity component (CVI) and the reliability of the findings was assessed based on the kappa coefficient test.
Results
The findings of this study led to the identification of ten components as follows: subject, participation, learner-centered, activation, learning context, support, knowledge and experience, presentation, application and evaluation which together form an educational model based on constructivism model.
Conclusion
The research findings suggest that the current model be used to increase student participation and interaction in the classroom.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "educational model"
  • " constructivism"
  • " learning theory"
  • "validation"
Altun, S., & Büyükduman, F. I. (2017). Teacher and student beliefs on constructivist instructional design: A case study. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 7(1), 30.
Banihashem, S. K. (2020). Developing and validating an educational design model based on constructivism theory in higher education with emphasis on learning analysis. Ph.D. Thesis educational technology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Allameh Tabatabai University. [Persian]
Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper's world 3. Educational researcher, 23(7), 21-23.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology3(2), 77-101.
Budoya, C., Kissaka, M., & Mtebe, J. (2019). Instructional design enabled agile method using ADDIE model and feature driven development method. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 15(1), 1-20.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, Co: BSCS, 5, 88-98.
Cheragh Mollaee, L., Kadivar, P., Sarrami, G., Montazer, G., & Ansari, A. (2016). Provide a conceptual model of educational design based on social networks and its validation, Iranian Curriculum Studies, 10(40), 7-32. [Persian]
Conole, G. (2012). Designing for learning in an open world (Vol. 4). Springer Science & Business Media.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Basics of Qualitative Research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 3.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction.
Goldie, J. G. S. (2016). Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical teacher, 38(10), 1064-1069.
Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). What is scaffolding. Teachers’ voices, 8, 8-16.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J., & Smaldino, S. (1999). Educational media and technologies for learning.
Holton III, E. F., & Baldwin, T. T. (2003). Improving learning transfer in organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
Ifenthaler, D., Gibson, D., & Dobozy, E. (2018). Informing learning design through analytics: Applying network graph analysis. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2).
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, 2, 215-239.
Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional design and learning theory. University of Saskatchewan. https://etad.usask.ca/802papers/mergel/mergel.pdf
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
Merrill, M. D. (2012). First principles of instruction. John Wiley & Sons.
Mor, Y., Craft, B., & Maina, M. (2015). Introduction: Learning design: Definitions, current issues and grand challenges. The art and science of learning design.
Nisha, B. (2019). The pedagogic value of learning design with virtual reality. Educational Psychology, 39(10), 1233-1254.
Oliver, K. M. (2000). Methods for Developing Constructivist Learning on the Web. Educational technology, 40(6), 5-18.
Papadakis, S. (2012). Enabling creative blended learning for adults through learning design. In P. S. Anastasiades (Ed.), Blended learning environments for adults: Evaluations and frameworks (pp. 257-273). IGI Global.
Parker, K. B., & Hessling, P. A. (2019). Breakout of a Traditional Classroom Reality with Game-Based Learning Pedagogy. In Handbook of Research on Innovative Digital Practices to Engage Learners (pp. 52-67). IGI Global.
Persico, D., & Pozzi, F. (2015). Informing learning design with learning analytics to improve teacher inquiry. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 230-248.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53.
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (94-131).
Rezaee, E. (2016). Development and validation of educational design model of Anboud free online courses based on communication theory learning theory in higher education system. Ph.D. Thesis educational technology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Allameh Tabatabai University. [Persian]
Seel, N. M., Lehmann, T., Blumschein, P., & Podolskiy, O. A. (2017). What is Instructional Design? In Instructional Design for Learning (1-17). SensePublishers: Rotterdam.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism. A learning theory for the digital age. In eLearnSpace.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design. New York, USA: Wiley & Sons.
Waltz, C. F., & Bausell, R. B. (1981). Nursing research: Design, statistics, and computer analysis. FA Davis Co.
Zandvanian, A., Zolfaghari, S., Hemati, H., & Talebi, S. (2020). Developing A rapid collaborative knowledge building model to encounter emerging situations based on grounded theory. Journal of Psychological Achievements, 27(2), 1-24. [Persian]
Zareei Zavaraki, E., Badli, M., & Amir Teymouri, M. H. (2013). Investigating the effect of using the basic principles of Merrill education on students' learning and retention. Journal of New thoughts on Education, 9(4), 55-74. [Persian]