<- Back to tangibles process website

Week One reviews

Review 1:

BEHAVIORISM, COGNITIVISM, CONSTRUCTIVISM

PEGGY A. ERTMER AND TIMOTHY J. NEWBY

Summary: Exploring the concepts of behavioral, cognitive, and constructive methods of learning with the context of instructional design.

Key takeaway: “The critical link, therefore, is not between the design of instruction and an autonomous body of knowledge about instructional phenomena, but between instructional design issues and the theories of human learning.” Understanding some of the key theories which have been tried and tested throughout time can lay the foundation towards effective instructional design. Among these theories, I was able to visualize the three learning principles - behavioral, cognitive, and constructive.
Within this spectrum, I observed that early learners that employ concrete thinking would respond better to behavioral learning methods. However, as they shift towards abstract thinking, cognitive methods of learning, that instills a better mental map through feedback and deduction, becomes more prominent. Finally, constructive learning relies on the foundation built by both these previous methods, but builds on the very human characteristic of unique perception. Therefore, instructional design must consider that knowledge retention and transfer for the learner relies on where they are within this continuum and the context within which it is taking place.

Real world example: I realized the process of learning cooking can demonstrate all three of these theories. From the natural cues and response from ingredients, utensils, and physical elements such as heat and taste guide our instincts throughout the action. There also needs to be a sense of problem solving or troubleshooting and experience through iterations that would fall within the domains of cognitive and constructive learning as well.

Burning question: Each of these methods have "environment" as a key element. However, when we operate against the assumption that every learner has an existing schema or a familiar environment that they are more exposed to, something new and contradictory may be opposed by the preexisting factors. Therefore, is retention of knowledge also dependent on the learner's background?
Review 2:

Paper Prototyping

Carolyn. Snyder

Summary: Paper prototyping is an effective, low-fidelity tool for usability testing. It involves users to interact with paper versions of an interface mock-up and a group of designers to monitor those interactions in order to make the design better.

Key takeaway: I was not familiar that such a method existed where, before any code appeared on the digital screen, the elements of an interface could be represented through something as simple as paper and get such reactions from test users. Its easy to put down pen on paper and come up with comps, wireframes, and compositions. However the idea of collaborative design, which is a proven method to yield effective results, with humans simulating the actions of a computer seem incredibly fun.

Real life example: This process reminded me of how I communicate with a tailor when I have to explain my dress designs to them. The tailor as the expert in their field would always communicate which design elements could be realistically made or not and the first tool for this method is pen and paper. Other times they would rely on readymade mock ups to explain which modifications could enable a close resemblance to my original design.

Burning question: This process seems highly effective for usability testing. But why is it not heard of as much? I realized a lot of products have historically failed, often with huge losses, because the interface was not user friendly enough. Why are these instances of failures not available for designers to learn from as case studies?
Review 3:

Snap Circuits

Review with The Happy Family Show on Youtube

When I had to study introductory circuits in high school, I felt intimidated by the archaic components with which we were supposed to build the DC circuits drawn casually by hand. I did not even understand properly the concept of current flow in a completed circuit. For a long time, I struggled with developing the mental map of how to power components. That is why not only did Snap Circuits seemed like a step in right direction for me, but also the fact that the review was done by a child for whom this process of building circuits came intuitively. This design falls into the foundational category of using building blocks by the learner to construct their own schema of how circuits and electrical components should work. Its also a plus that the components have attractive designs and are safe to handle.