[quoting Sims, 21 Feb 96] First, there IS a difference between INSTRUCTION (the imparting of knowledge) and LEARNING (the acquisition of knowledge), although the two are inexorably linked. However, when it comes to using the computer as a means to facilitate either one of these, it is important to determine whether you believe that the computer is a good TEACHER or a better learning TOOL. While it can be programmed to do both, I believe that it is better suited as a TOOL, which then suggests that it falls into a constructivist mode rather than an instructional mode. And, where is the problem with an instructional strategy using constructivist ideas?
I am an instructivist and I believe that constructivism is utterly wrong as an EXPLANATION of learning, but I agree with your statement above. Reason: Education typically involves some sort of "conversation" between teachers and students. The problem is, we don't understand completely what a "conversation" is, and we certainly can't emulate one convincingly with a computer program designed to teach. Therefore, it seems more productive to work on cognitive tools which facilitate the acquisition of knowledge and skills.