[quoting Dalgarno, 27 Jan 97] Wouldn't most people agree that "ISD" taken as a whole in the form that we normally understand it, is in fact mutually exclusive with constructivism.
Think about Barney's note. Does not "constructivism" permit each person to have some say about how they "construct" reality? If so, would not "traditional ISD" (whatever that is taken to be) represent a legitimate part of how someone thinks about designing instruction? Or did I miss the place where constructivism explicitly excludes ISD types of thinking?
Stated another way, would not it be logically inconsistent for constructivism to exclude any types or ways of thinking?