SlideShare a Scribd company logo

It use in mba

Devanshu Khandelwal, profile picture
Devanshu Khandelwal

This document provides a theoretical overview of how different models of learning can influence the effective use of information technology in management education. It discusses major models of learning, including objectivism, constructivism, and collaborative learning. The models make differing assumptions about knowledge transfer and the roles of instructors and students. Initial uses of classroom IT often simply automate traditional instruction. However, matching technologies to learning models could transform education through "informating up, down, and creating a virtual learning space."

BusinessTechnology
1 of 28
Download to read offline
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Use of Information Technology to Enhance Management School Education: A Theoretical View Author(s): Dorothy E. Leidner and Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa Source: MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 3, Special Issue on IS Curricula and Pedagogy, (Sep., 1995), pp. 265-291 Published by: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/249596 Accessed: 15/04/2008 11:44 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=misrc. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We enable the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. http://www.jstor.org
Modelsof Learning The Use of nologies in which management schools should invest in order to informate up and down and ul- Information timately transform the educational environment and processes. For researchers interested in Technology to the use of information technology to improve learning processes, the paper provides a theo- Enhance retical foundation for future work. Management School Keywords Educational technology, classroom technology, electronic classrooms, learning, Education: A instruction Theoretical View ISRL Categories: AA06, HB08 Introduction By: Dorothy E. Leidner Baylor University Although universities create and acquire knowl- P.O. Box 98005 edge, they are seldom successful in applying Waco, Texas 76798 that knowledge to their own activities (Garvin, U.S.A. 1993). In fact, academic institutions typically lag businesses by roughly a decade in the adoption dorothy_leidner@business.baylor.edu of new technologies (U.S. Congress, 1988). This is certainly true in terms of the application of in- Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa formation technology (IT) into the learning proc- The University of Texas at Austin ess: the blackboard and chalk remain the Graduate School of Business, primaryteaching technologies in many business CBA5.202 schools even while the merits of information Austin, Texas 78712 technology to improve communication, effi- U.S.A. ciency, and decision making in organizations sjarven paa@mail.utexas.edu are recognized and inculcated by IS re- searchers. However, as business schools expe- rience increased competitive pressures, Abstract information technology is one area that schools To use information technology to improve leam- might use to differentiate or compete with or, more importantly, to use as a catalyst for trans- ing processes, the pedagogical assumptions un- forming educational processes. IT is not her- derlying the design of information technology for alded as a miraculous yet unpredictable means educational purposes must be understood. This of mitigating educational attrition, but as an effi- paper reviews different models of leaming, sur- cacious means of enabling intentional changes faces assumptions of electronic teaching tech- in teaching and learning processes. nology, and relates those assumptions to the differing models of learning. Our analysis sug- Some business schools have already begun gests that initial attempts to bring information building classroom facilities that incorporate in- technology to management education follow a formation technologies in hopes of improving classic story of automating rather than trans- the learning and teaching processes. For exam- forming. IT is primarily used to automate the in- ple, the University of Maryland houses an elec- formation delivery function in classrooms. In the tronic classroom that enables groups of absence of fundamental changes to the teach- students to work together while communicating ing and learning process, such classrooms may electronically and anonymously (Alavi, 1994). At do little but speed up ineffective processes and Harvard Business School, a pilot program was methods of teaching. Our mapping of technolo- conducted where each student's dormitory room gies to learning models identifies sets of tech- was equipped with a personal computer networked MISQuarterly/September 1995 265
Modelsof Learning to share laser printersand scanners in common of pedagogical assumptions helps to identify the livingspaces. Interactivecomputerapplications types of technologies that automate the tradi- and simulationexercises were used to supple- tionallearningmodel and those that begin to en- ment the traditionalcase study preparation. Stu- able transformation a new model. Borrowing into dents had access to digitizedvideos on factories, from the technology and organizationalchange production processes, marketing campaigns, literature,three transformationalvisions are de- and interviewswith protagonistsfrom the case scribed: informate up, informate down, and study firms, allowing the students "to 'visit'the transform a virtuallearningspace. The paper to factory they were studying and 'meet' the key concludes witha discussion of technologies that players in the case" before going to class. The management schools might consider investing students also had access to Headline News, a in if they desire radicalchanges in their educa- consolidationof majornews fromleading maga- tionalprocesses. zines and newspapers across the world,and a plethora of economic and financialdatabases from commercial providersto augment the in- dustry analysis (The Harbus News, 1994). Theories of Learning: Althoughpromising,these developmentsremain isolated experimentseven withintheirown insti- Assumptions tutions. While such developments representat- The use of ITin an educationalsettingwillreflect tempts to provide technology tools to improve either purposelyor inadvertently some model of the teaching and/orlearningprocesses, they are learning.The followingreview of learningmod- often undertaken without a thorough assess- els is not exhaustive; ratherit seeks to highlight ment of the learninggains desired or even pos- major differences among the more widely ac- sible. For instance, high expectations without cepted models of learning in terms of their as- clear objectives and realisticgoals may lead to sumptions,goals, and instructional implications. the development of state-of-the-art facilities,at once impressive yet intimidating, Learningmodels are often classified as being replete with behavioral or cognitive. Objectivism, also re- potentialyet lacking clear guidelines on how to ferred to as the traditionalmodel of learning,is use the technology to achieve learningimprove- the behavioralmodel of learningand represents ments. Earlyresearch in the area of learningim- a traditional view of learning.The primary com- provements that may be facilitated with peting cognitive model is constructivism.The information technology is thus needed. The ob- constructivist model has a numberof derivations jective of this paper is to delineate technologies includingcollaborativism and cognitive informa- currently available to support traditionaland tion processing. The socioculturalism model non-traditional methods of learning in order to shares some assumptions and goals with con- help guide universitiesin their learningtechnol- but structivism, challenges some others.1 ogy investmentdecisions, to help professors ef- fectively apply the new classroom technologies, and to manage the expectations of university administratorsand professors concerning the The objectivistmodel of learning benefits of the technologies. The objectivistmodel of learning is based on Skinner's stimulus-response theory: learningis The premise of this paper is that the effective- a change in the behavioraldispositionof an or- ness of information technology in contributing to ganism (Jonassen, 1993) thatcan be shaped by learningwill be a functionof how well the tech- selective reinforcement. The tenet of the model nology supports a particularmodel of learning is that there is an objective realityand that the and the appropriatenessof the model to a par- goal of learningis to understandthis realityand ticularlearningsituation.The paper begins with a discussion of the most commonlyadvocated 1 Social learningtheory is yet another model of learningand models of learning. How the assumptions of IT lies somewhere in the middleof an objectivist-constructivist are intertwined with the assumptions of the continuum.The interested reader is referred to Grusec learningmodels is then analyzed. The mapping (1992). 266 MIS Quarterly/September 1995
Modelsof Learning modify behavior accordingly (Jonassen, 1993). factual or procedural-based learning. However, The goal of teaching is to facilitate the transfer models challenging objectivism have emerged. of knowledge from the expert to the learner. Er- The most widely accepted alternate model is rors in understanding are the result of imperfect constructivism and its derivations-collaborativ- or incomplete knowledge transfer. The model ism and cognitive information processing. makes several pedagogical assumptions re- garding learning and instruction. In terms of learning, the first assumption is that there exists The constructivist model of learning a reality that is agreed upon by individuals. Sec- Constructivism denies the existence of an exter- ond, this reality can be represented and trans- nal reality independent of each individual's mind. ferred to a learner. Third, the purpose of the Rather than transmitted, knowledge is created, mind is to act as a mirrorof reality rather than as or constructed, by each learner. The mind is not an interpreterof reality (Jonassen, 1993). Fourth, a tool for reproducing the external reality, but all learners use essentially the same processes rather the mind produces its own, unique con- for representing and understanding the world. ception of events (Jonassen, 1993). Each reality In terms of instruction, the objectivist model as- is somewhat different, based on learners' expe- sumes that the goal of teaching is to efficiently riences and biases. More moderate construc- transmit knowledge from the expert to the tivists do not preclude the possibility of the learner. Instructors structure reality into abstract existence of an objective world, but assume that or generalized representations that can be each individual constructs his or her own reality transferred and then recalled by students of the objective world (Yarusso, 1992). Eventu- (Yarusso, 1992). For example, words in a lan- ally, having analyzed different interpretations of guage are symbolic representations of the exter- information, the learner is able to detach himself nal world enabling individuals to communicate from a subjective world of personal experience using symbols rather than pointing to actual ob- to the formation of abstract concepts to repre- jects. Individuals must share the same under- sent reality (O'Loughlin, 1992). Learning, then, standing of the words in order to communicate is the formation of abstract concepts to repre- efficiently. The objectivist model also assumes sent reality; learning is that which "decentrizes" that the instructor is the source of objective the individual from the material. Learning is re- knowledge that is related, rather then created, flected in "intellectual growth that leads to scien- during class. The instructor should be in control tific reasoning, abstract thought, and formal of the material and pace of learning. Via ques- operations" (O'Loughlin, 1992). tions, the instructor assesses whether transfer The constructivist model calls for learner-cen- occurred. Another assumption is that students tered instruction: individuals are assumed to learn best in isolated and intensive confronta- learn better when they are forced to discover tions with a subject matter. things themselves rather than when they are told, The lecture method of teaching embeds the or instructed. Students must control the pace of pedagogical assumptions of the objectivist instruction. Based upon the work of Piaget, the model of learning. The lecture method is the learner must have experience with hypothesiz- most frequently used instructional method in ing and predicting, manipulating objects, posing higher education (McKeachie, 1990). To an ob- questions, researching answers, imagining, in- jectivist, the presentation of information is criti- vestigating, and inventing, in order for knowl- cal. Any mechanism that enhances the edge construction to occur (O'Loughlin, 1992).2 communication of the knowledge should en- hance the transfer, or student learning. The 2 It should be noted that Piaget's theory, which forms the foundation of constructivism, was based on his studies of the model also implies that the pace of instruction psychological development of children. Although children should be designed modularly with students' need physical actions to grasp new information, adults need progressing on one topic area before proceed- vivid examples and illustrations (O'Loughlin, 1992). Thus, ing to the next one. while the concepts underlying constructivism may seem appealing to those who disagree with the underlying The objectivist model may be the most appropri- assumptions of traditionalism, they may be less applicable to ate model in some contexts-for example, in adult learning situations. MISQuarterly/September 1995 267
Modelsof Learning The teacher serves as the creative mediatorof Consequently, in additionto sharing the peda- the process. Classtime mightbecome a project- gogical assumptions of constructivism, collabo- oriented session where the instructorprovides ratists also assume that knowledge is created tools for helping learners construct their own as it is shared, and the more it is shared, the views of reality.Learning focuses on discovering more is learned. Anotherpedagogical assump- conceptual relationships,exploringmultiple rep- tion is that learners have priorknowledge they resentations or perspectives on an issue, and/or can contributeto the discussion. A third as- immersingthe learner in the real-world context sumptionis that participation criticalto learn- is in which the learning is relevant (Jonassen, ing. A fourth assumption is that learners will 1993). Lastly,constructivism advocates non-cri- participateif given optimal conditions such as terion forms of performanceassessments such small groupsto workwith. as student learningjournals(Hawkins,1993). One implication the cooperativemodel for in- of However, in practice,constructivismis often re- structional methods is that the instructor's is role duced to students'searchingforthe preordained to facilitatemaximalinformation knowledge and knowledge that could be more efficiently trans- sharing among learners ratherthan controlling mitted via the instructor. This tends to happen the contentand deliveryof learning.Anotherim- particularly with fact-based or procedurallearn- plicationis that the instructor's role is to provide ing. Criticsof constructivismargue that there is feedback duringclass although feedback from little benefit in having learners construct such the learner'speers is similarly critical.Forexam- preordainedknowledge;it is only when learners ple, students are foundto plan more extensively are allowed to construct new meaning, such as and writemore carefullywhen they are commu- in higher-orderlearning,that the goals of con- nicating with an audience of peers than when structivismare truly achieved. However, it can they are being evaluated solely by the instructor also be argued that greater understandingof (Bagley and Hunter, 1992). However, groups factual and procedural material results when withoutinstructor feedback are unable to attain learners are forced to discover the knowledge the same level of understandingor mastery as themselves than when they are merelytold. groups with both peer and instructorfeedback (Stephenson, 1992). A third implicationfor in- struction the need for cooperativeassessment is The cooperative model of learning strategies. The traditionalcompetitive assess- ment strategies may disable learning:a learner An offspring of the constructivistmodel is the may be motivated to withholdknowledge that cooperative, or collaborative, learning model. wouldotherwisebe shared withpeers. Whereas in constructivismlearningis assumed to occur as an individual interactswith objects, Studies have demonstrated that cooperative in collaborativism,learningemerges throughin- learning is superiorto individualistic instruction teraction of individualswith other individuals in a wide arrayof content areas in terms of in- (Slavin, 1990). Learningoccurs as individuals creases in individual achievement, positive exercise, verify,solidify,and improvetheirmen- changes in social attitudes, and general en- tal models through discussion and information hancement of motivation learn (Flynn,1992). to sharing. The contributionof different under- Learnerstend to generate higher-levelreason- standings leads to a new, shared knowledge ing strategies, a greater diversityof ideas and (Whipple,1987). Whereas instructor-ledcom- procedures, more critical thinking, and more munication is inherently linear, collaborative creative responses when they are activelylearn- groups allow more branching and concentric- ing in cooperative groups than when they are ity (Flynn, 1992). Although the major goal of or learningindividually competitively (Schlechter, cooperative learning is the construction of 1990). Even when the instructional environment shared understanding through interaction of group projectswas not geared towardcoop- with other individuals, an implicit goal is im- erative learning, cooperative learning occurred proving communication and listening skills and contributed to longer-term retention and eliciting participation. (Schlechter,1990). 1995 268 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning The cognitive information concepts to represent reality. Rather, knowledge cannot be divorced from the historical and cul- processing model of learning tural background of the learner (O'Loughlin, The cognitive information processing model is 1992). The more meaningful, the more deeply or another extension of the constructivist model elaboratively processed, the more situated in and focuses on cognitive processes used in context, and the more rooted in cultural back- learning. Learning involves processing instruc- ground, metacognition, and personal knowledge tional input to develop, test, and refine mental an event is, the more readily it is learned (Iran- models in long-term memory until they are effec- Nejad, et al., 1990). While socioculturalists em- tive and reliable enough in problem-solving situ- brace the concept that there is no one external ations (Schuell, 1986). The frequency and reality, they argue that constructivism and col- intensity with which a student cognitively pro- laborativism force the minority culture into cesses instructional input controls the pace of adopting the understanding derived by the ma- learning. Instructional inputs that are unnoticed, jority. Even a collaborative work group does or unprocessed, by learners cannot have any not foster participation for minorities: "shared impact on mental models (Bovy, 1981; Brun- understanding" is biased by cultural and social ning, 1983). factors. A major assumption of the model is that learners The major assumption of socioculturalism is that differ in terms of their preferred learning style. middle-class Anglo male America has prevented Instructional methods that match an individual's a genuinely emancipatory environment "inwhich learning style will be the most effective (Bovy, students begin to construct meaning on their 1981). This suggests the need for individualized own terms and in their own interests" (O'Lough- instruction. The cognitive processing model also lin, 1992). The objectivist model of learning is assumes that the individual's prior knowledge is seen as one that negates the subjective voices represented by a mental model in memory and that students develop from their own culture and that the mental model, or schemata, is an impor- becomes an instrument of power perpetuating tant determinant of how effectively the learner the social class inherent in society by forcing all will process new information. The implication is students to speak in the dialogue acceptable to that the instructional support required is in- the instructor and peers (O'Loughlin, 1992). The versely related to the depth of existing knowl- major implication of socioculturalism is that stu- edge as well as to the effectiveness of the dents should participate on their own terms. In- learner's information processing style (Bovy, struction should not deliver a single interpretation 1981). A third assumption is that given a of reality nor a culturally biased interpretation of learner's limited information processing capac- reality. In comparison to the constructivist and ity, attention is selective (Bovy, 1981). Selective cognitive models, the sociocultural model is in a attention is an interrelated function of the dis- nascent stage, and practical applications of the play, the cognitive structure of the learner, and model to instruction are still being formulated. the prior experience of the learner. Preinstruc- tional methods such as topic outlines and learn- ing goals might improve learning because they direct attention (Brunning, 1983). Summary The learning theories are summarized in Table 1. Figure 1 graphically illustrates the similarities and The socioculturalmodel of learning differences among learning models.3 Whereas collaborativism and the cognitive infor- The objective model assumes that an instructor mation processing model are extensions of con- should be in control of the learning environment structivism, the sociocultural model is both an 3 The figuremaps current learningtheoriesonly.Because it is extension of and a reaction against some as- a multidimensional figure presented in two dimensions, sumptions of constructivism. In particular, so- certain hypotheticalmodels (such as a model where the cioculturalists disagree with Piaget's view that instructor in control,butknowledgeis createdby students) is the goal of learning is the formation of abstract cannotbe represented thisfigure. on MIS Quarterly/September 1995 269
Modelsof Learning Table 1. Summary of Learning Models Implications for Model Basic Premise Goals Assumptions Major Instruction Objectivism Learning the is Transferof Instructorhouses Instructor in is uncritical absorption knowledge all necessary controlof material of objective frominstructor knowledge. and pace. knowledge. to student. Studentslearnbest Instructorprovides Recallof in isolatedand stimulus. knowledge. intensivesubject matter. Constructivism Learning a is Formation of Individualslearn Learner-centered process of abstractconcepts betterwhen they active learning. constructing to representreality. discoverthings knowledgeby an themselves and for Instructor individual. Assigningmeaning when they control supportratherthan to events and the pace of learning. direction. information. Collaborativism Learning emerges Promotegroup Involvement is Communication- throughshared skills-commun- critical learning. to oriented. understandingsof ication,listening, morethanone participation. Learnershave as Instructor learner. some prior questionerand Promote knowledge. discussion leader. socialization. Cognitive Learning the is Improve cognitive Limited selective Aspects of stimulus Information processingand processingabilities attention. can affect attention. Processing transferof new of learners. knowledgeinto Priorknowledge need Instructors long-term memory. Improve recalland affects level of feedback on retention. instructional studentlearning. supportneeded. Socioculturism Learning is Empowerment. Angloshave is Instruction subjectiveand distorted always culturally individualistic. Emancipatory knowledgeand value laden. learning. framedinformation in theirown terms. Instructionis Action-oriented, embedded in a sociallyconscious Learningoccurs person's everyday learnerswitha view best in cultural/social to change rather environments context. thanaccept or where personally understand society. well known. (i.e., pace and material), that learning is dis- parate points of view, that knowledge is person- semination of knowledge, that dissemination ally experienced but can be shared through col- best occurs via abstract representations of the laborating, and that the realism of context is reality, and that learning occurs best in isolated high in the sense that individual experiences settings (i.e., the context of the learning environ- prior to learning are real but low in the sense ment need not be "real"). Collaborativismassumes that the experiences are shared vicariously that the control of the learning environment through discourse. Constructivism assumes that should rest with the peer groups, that learning is the learner needs to be in control of the learning the sharing of knowledge representative of dis- environment, that learning is the creation of 1995 270 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning Realism of Context Low High Creationof Knowledge Socioculturalism Learner by Student Cognitive Information Processing Constructivism Control Learning Sharingof of the is Knowledge Peer Learning Group Environment Collaborativism Dissemination of Knowledge by Instructor Instructor Objectivism A bstractions Personally I Knowledge is Experienced Figure 1. The Dimensions of the Learning Theories knowledge, and that the realism of the context the many dimensions of a given course. Infor- for learning needs to be high. Cognitive informa- mation technology can then be a facilitator of tion processing differs from constructivism in the effective application of the learning models. emphasizing that learning is the formation of ab- The next section establishes links between the stract concepts to represent reality and that the assumptions of the learning models and the as- context need not necessarily be high in order for sumptions of the information technologies in such abstraction to occur. Socioculturism as- use in educational settings. sumes that the learner must be in control of learning, that learning is interpretation of knowl- edge by the learner, that specificity and immer- sion in experiential activities promote learning, and that learning best occurs in the context in Information Technologies: which it will be used. Surfacing Educational No particular model is the best approach; in- Assumptions deed, different learning approaches will be ap- The technology discussion is organized accord- propriate depending on the circumstances- ing to what is labeled visions of electronic class- course content, student experience, maturity, rooms-each vision representing a different intelligence, and instructor goals, skills, and potential impact of IT on learning. These visions preferences, among others. However, the in- were derived from the organizational research structor must be cognizant of the choice of a on ITvisions (Schein, 1992; Zuboff, 1988): auto- learning model. Moreover, the instructor should mating, informating up, informating down, and be aware of the different learning models and transforming. Some technologies can facilitate the different outcomes anticipated by the mod- more than one vision. Both positive and nega- els. The chosen model must take into account tive potential outcomes of technologies are MISQuarterly/September 1995 271
Modelsof Learning discussed. The technologies are also discussed screen duringclass, and providing students the in terms of the underlying assumptions regard- ability to printthe instructor'slecture outlines. ing the way in which they facilitatelearningand The most well-likedmethodwas video clips, but relate this to the learningmodels of the previous these were also judged the least helpful to section. learning.The abilityto printthe instructor's lec- ture notes were the second most well-likedas- pect of the technology. less-likedtopicoutlines The The vision to automate:automated projectedfrom a computerwere deemed most classrooms helpfulto learning. The vision to automate is the perceptionthat IT At BaylorUniversity (Leidner,1994), the instruc- is a means of replacing expensive, unreliable tor consoles in smaller classes contributedto human labor with information technology.In or- both perceived and actual structure. Students ganizations characterizedby the vision to auto- perceived the courses taught in the automated mate, the role of IT is to provide operational classrooms to be more organized than courses savings and improve quality by performing taught in traditional classrooms. The advanced structured, routine, operational tasks reliably preparation a presentationor a softwaredem- of and efficiently.Because teaching and learning onstrationenforced a structureto the class that are at best semi-structured activities,neither is might not otherwise have existed. Students re- conducive to automation.Yet certainaspects of ported high satisfactionin the automatedclass- instruction,particularly delivery of informa- the room, but did not reportgreater learningthan in tion characteristics of the objectivistmodel of a traditional classroom for a varietyof different learning,are proneto automation. courses. The structuremighthave contributed to the students' satisfactionwith the learningpro- Information technologies whose purpose is to cess althoughthe technology might have elimi- providetools for manipulating presentingin- and nated the informaldiscussion that would have structionalmaterialin a classroom are referred to in this paper as classroom automationtech- promotedknowledgecreation. nology. These include: (1) instructorconsoles Similarly,a study conducted by the Air Force equipped withpresentationsoftwareand display Academy found no significantdifferencein per- consoles and stand-alone controls, (2) instructor formance, althoughit found significantimprove- student computers, (3) computer-assisted in- ments in student attitudes about the instructor struction (drilland practice programs),and (4) and the course when students were taught in distance learning. classrooms equipped with instructorworksta- tions and videodisks versus when taught in a traditional classroom (Gist, et al., 1988). A new- ness effect-a fascination with the technology Instructor Console -might also explain the results. This is similar The instructorconsole refers to a computer to results found with transparenciesin the early 1970s (Neter and Chervany,1973). As a conse- equipped with end-user software and used by an instructorin a classroom. The technology quence, although the automated classrooms may hold littleadvantage over traditional class- may be a permanentfixtureof the classroom or rooms in terms of actual student learning,they may be broughtin on a cart. The primary goals are the facilitation presentations-freeing the of may influencestudent attitudestowardthe qual- instructorfrom the tedium of writingon a chalk- and towardthe organization ity of the instructor board and making the presentation more vivid of the course. and memorablefor students. The use of an instructorconsole is based on A study at Northwestern University (Janda, several pedagogical assumptions. One is that 1989) examines the impactof the instructorcon- teaching is about presenting material;technol- sole in large (over 200 students) government ogy can improveboth the process and product classes on student attitudes toward showing The of presentation. improvement occurs through short video clips on events in Americanpolitics, the use of color and graphics. Prior research has found that graphics can create interest and projectingtopic outlines of lecture notes on a 1995 272 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning appeal to the users, can increase the compre- appropriate software and assist the students hension of the information, and can help the in- when they encounter problems (Leidner and formation be more easily remembered Jarvenpaa, 1993). The former use of the tech- (DeSanctis, 1984). Color has been shown to in- nology supports the objectivist model of learn- crease attention but not necessarily comprehen- ing; the latter, constructivism. sion of information (DeSanctis, 1984). Similarly, At the college level, a positive relationship was borrowing from graphics research in the organ- found between student control of learning with izational context, the mode of presentation of motivation and performance (Fisher and Grant, classroom information may affect student com- 1983). Engaging in in-class analysis of various prehension, student recall, and student perform- alternatives to a problem allows students to con- ance as well as student attitude (Benbasat and struct knowledge via computers. One study Dexter, 1985; Watson and Driver, 1983). (Leidner and Jarvenpaa, 1993), however, found The instructor console technology most closely a low percentage of use for such constructivist maps to the objectivist models of learning and learning and a higher percentage of use for soft- instruction. The instructor maintains control over ware demonstrations where students were the content and pace of instruction, the focus is merely emulating the instructor. The sessions in on knowledge dissemination rather than knowl- which students were allowed to analyze data in edge creation, and the instructor remains the teams of two proved to be the most constructive primary source of knowledge. The technology method in the classroom; during these sessions, maps secondarily to the cognitive information exploratory discussions at a high conceptual processing model. The more structured and level were common. A similar finding was re- vivid the transmission, the easier it is for a ported in Carrier and Sales (1987). learner to absorb the information.4The cognitive The use of instructor console and stand-alone information processing model would attribute this result to outlines that are learning strategies computers assumes that altering the delivery of information by presentation technologies or by that help students more readily process and or- allowing students to emulate an instructor will ganize information in their memory. However, outlines could also be manually provided or writ- improve the learning process. These assump- tions align with the objectivist model, whereas ten on a chalkboard. The role of the technology the assumption that learning will be more effec- is to increase the ease of displaying an outline, tive if the student is required to actively perform rather than causing the outline to be effective. procedures during class supports a construc- tivist model of learning. Instructor Console and Stand-Alone Student Computers Computer-Assisted Instruction A slightly more advanced automated classroom (CAI)/Computer-Based Training (CBT) would include stand-alone5 computers on stu- dents' desks to provide them with access to the Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is an inter- active software program that provides informa- same software packages as the instructor. This tion in sequential or non-linear modes to helps students learn by enabling them to emu- increase a student's knowledge and under- late an instructor's steps on a particularsoftware standing of a subject matter (Lay, 1989-90).6 package. Another approach is for the instructor to give students a problem to analyze using the Among the most lauded goals of CAI is to give control of the learning process to the learner. 4 Yet media research consistently fails to find significant 6 CAI has been the term used for interactive computer-based learning differences across varying delivery mechanisms systems used in educational systems, while similar systems (Clark 1991). Clark argues that the reason for this is that used in organizational training have been commonly referred many different media attributes accomplish the same to as Computer-Based Training. More recently, Interactive learning goal and that any teaching method could be Learning System (ILS) has become the term encompassing designed into a variety of media presentations. both interactive computer-assisted instruction and interactive 5 We say stand-alone meaning that the computers are not computer-based training. This varies from the earlier CAI and equipped with communication facilities between the CBT because it gives more control over the sequence of computers nor with access to exteral sources of information. informationpresented to the learner. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 273
Modelsof Learning However, though based on constructivist rheto- the student is guided so that he/she reaches the ric, most CAI and computer-based training predefined knowledge built into the system. (CBT) have provided drill and practice tutorials However, CAI may ease the cognitive load of that presented information in a highly structured, sorting through material and may enable stu- linear fashion. Thus, while purportingto individu- dents to process information at their own pace. alize instruction and allow individuals to process Thus, CAI, CBT, and ILS can be viewed as en- information according to their preferred learning hancing the cognitive information processing of style, CAI and CBT primarilyserved as reliable students by making the learning process more and consistent delivery sources of course mate- individuallytailored. rial. Advances in technology enabled the devel- opment of more interactive CAI that was less structured and gave more control over the se- Distance Learning quence of information presentation to the Distance learning is the transmission of a learner. These systems are sometimes referred course from one location to another. The goal is to as interactive learning systems (ILS); yet to provide education to locations that might not these too are based on ensuring that learners have the resources to offer courses or enable are exposed to predetermined knowledge even employees to take a course without leaving the though much more of the control for the se- organization's premises. There are many exam- quencing of the information is given to the ples of distance learning. One example is TI-IN learner. Network, Inc., a Texas-based private company While studies of CAI have found increased that provides over 30 high school courses and staff development opportunities via satellite to learning (Clark, 1986), these results could also be attributed to aspects incorporated into the more than 250 subscribing school districts and other educational agencies in Texas as well as system such as feedback, drilland practice, and 20 other states. Experienced and qualified in- self-paced progression that are independent of the technology (i.e., they could be incorporated structors holding at least a master's degree in into other non-computer media). For example, the subject broadcast their courses from studios one study comparing manual drill-and-practice in San Antonio, and the schools receive the sig- to computer-based drill-and-practice found that nals via satellite. In Minnesota, rural school dis- it was not the media (the computer) that affected tricts use a system of fiber optics, multiple video monitors, and cameras to link together class- performance, but rather the drill-and-practice method itself that was just as effectively carried rooms up to 78 miles apart so that the teacher out manually as with the computer (Clark,1991). can see the students in up to three other loca- tions simultaneously. The originating classroom While CAI, CBT, and ILS vary, pedagogical as- has one camera on the teacher, one on the stu- sumptions regarding the way these technologies dents, and one on the teachers' desk (U.S. Con- improve learning typically include: learners learn gress, 1988). MBA programs in Arizona, more effectively and efficiently when they are in California, Monterrey (Mexico), and Western control of the pace, feedback is a critical part of Ontario (Canada), among others, provide video effective learning, and active involvement leads conferencing alternatives to attending regular to more effective learning than passive involve- classes. ment. Thus, CAI is based on the stimulus-re- Distance learning supports the objectivist model sponse-feedback views of learning that are associated with the objectivist model of learning. of knowledge transmission, only now the knowl- Though CAI may enable more efficient interac- edge is transmitted to students at different loca- tions. From a learning theory perspective, it can tion, interacting with the computer cannot be taken as a substitute for human interaction. CAI be argued that distance learning supports the is therefore more rooted in the objective rather sociocultural model of learning by allowing stu- than collaborative or sociocultural models of dents to remain embedded in their cultural envi- ronments rather than forcing them to adopt a learning. The structure built into the system tends to prevent constructivist learning because new culture. However, the learners are still it enables learners to construct new knowledge; forced to adopt the language and culture of the 1995 274 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning instructor since the instructor remains the nu- that information is being delivered by the in- cleus of the class. Distance learning facilities structor. This pedagogical assumption is closely can be equipped with facilities to enable stu- linked to the objectivist model of learning. By dents to communicate with each other and enabling an instructorto ask questions based on hence to promote collaborative learning across material being covered and to assess the de- distances. Such environments are examined in gree of understanding by the responses, key re- the section "InformatingDown." sponse pad technology facilitates more effective knowledge transmission and comprehension. The technology is secondarily related to cogni- The vision to informateup: tive information processing. The technology pro- providingan instructoraccess to motes feedback on students' learning. information An extension of key response pad technology The vision to informate up is defined as the goal would be to provide a full keyboard so that stu- of using IT as a management control tool to dents could ask and answer questions using full keep managers informed of detailed aspects of sentences. Such a facility is provided at the Uni- their organization's performance (Schein, 1992). versity of Arizona's electronic classroom "Exem- In an educational context, such a vision would plar" (Briggs, et al., 1992; Briggs and Ramesh, entail giving the instructor feedback concerning 1992). The students' inputs are anonymously student understanding of class material in a displayed on a common screen. The professor timely fashion so that the instructor could clarify can then discuss each input. In this case, the misunderstandings and misinterpretations. As- technology is more closely linked to the cogni- pects of typical college classrooms that prevent tive information processing model of learning. informating up may include student proclivity to One weakness with the question and answer fa- be reticent during class, lack of effective cues to cility of Exemplar is its infeasibility for large let the instructor know when information is being classes. In a large class of 30 or more students, misconstrued, and the unavailability of the in- it would be very time-consuming for the instruc- structor at the time when the student has a tor to go down the list of responses. This would question. One technological response is key re- likely lead to a great deal of boredom. Students sponse pads; another is e-mail between instruc- whose responses were not discussed by the in- tors and their students. structor would receive negative reinforcement for the desired participative behavior and might tend to not contribute to future questions. Such Key Response Pads questions as the ideal class size and the level of Key response pads enable a large class of stu- learning possible with response pad technology dents to participate by responding to questions should be addressed in future research. with a yes/no response or rating agreement to an issue on a scale from 0 to 9. The goal of key Electronic Mail Between Instructor and response pad technology is to make the instruc- Students tor more aware of whether students are follow- ing the content being discussed so that he/she Another technology that can informate up is can modify the flow and intensity of information electronic mail between instructors and students transfer if necessary. For instance, a study of outside of the classroom.7 Electronic mail allows IBM's electronic training facility shows that while students to ask questions as they are reviewing the lecture mode of teaching was much more material outside of class and to receive delayed time-efficient in terms of the material covered, the attentiveness of the students was greater in 7 Electronic mail is a technologythat can be used to support the "facilitation"mode in which frequent student several of the visions. The natureof the use willthereforebe responses were elicited via key response tech- specifiedto indicatewhy it is relevantto the particularvision nology (Horowitz, 1988). being discussed. For informatingup, e-mail between instructorsand students is relevant, whereas student-to- Key response pad technology assumes that the student e-mail is relevant for informating down or virtual instructor is the nucleus of the classroom and learningdepending the contextof use. on MIS Quarterly/September 1995 275
Modelsof Learning feedback from the instructor. Electronic mail The vision to informatedown: might facilitate communication between stu- dents and instructors, particularly in large (30 providingstudents greater access students plus) classes, that tends to discourage to information questions. The delay in feedback from a cogni- Informating down is the use of technology to tive perspective is undesirable, yet the ability to provide information to lower levels in an organi- ask the question as it arises might outweigh the zation. Informatingdown is, in Schein's words, a disadvantage of the delayed response. "more radical IT use" than automating or infor- mating up because it may usurp the control of One account of electronic mail's value to stu- senior and middle management and demystify dents is the "dial a teacher" electronic mail pro- their role in the organization. In the context of vided by educational psychology professors at education, informating down provides informa- the Stephen F. Austin University to student tion to students to allow them to critically ana- teachers. Student teachers addressed questions lyze information or discuss issues among a set to the "experts" concerning child behavioral of peers. In this section, informating down tech- problems, course preparation problems, and in- nologies are examined in two broad categories: structional problems. Many of the messages re- the provision of information to learners and the ceived from the student teachers requested help provision of communication facilities to learners. with lesson-plan ideas on specific topics or cer- Technologies designed to provide information to tain kinds of individual discipline problems learners are referred to as Information Class- (Lowe, 1993). A similar system is used at Iowa room Technologies, and technologies designed State University. Patterns of communication to provide communication facilities to learners there found that the most common topic of com- are referred to as Communication Classroom munication for new teachers was on general Technologies. Such technologies can be imple- education issues, followed by technical issues mented in ordinary classrooms and do not as- and classroom management issues (Thompson sume the building of a special physical facility to and Hayes, 1993). house the technology. Electronic mail solicits feedback concerning stu- dent understanding of course material and hence, promotes the cognitive information processing Information Classroom Technologies model of learning. It is, however, unclear whether this feedback is similar in quality to that obtained Information classroom technologies facilitate via a traditional verbal question-and-answer student access to information to improve the session. A study of electronic mail in organiza- availability or reality of learning materials. In tions found that 62 percent of the messages contrast to automated classrooms that improve constituted "new" information-information re- the efficiency of information delivery, the goal here is to make new, qualitatively better informa- spondents reported they would not have other- wise sent or received (Sproull and Kiesler, tion available that would otherwise not be. 1986). People felt more comfortable sending Learning networks, hypermedia, simulations, and virtual reality are information classroom messages to superiors than to subordinates. If these results hold in an education environment, technologies. students might feel more comfortable asking Learning Networks: Learning networks are certain questions electronically than face to comprised of networked computers with links to face. Contrary to media richness theory, e-mail shared databases developed by educators at has been found to be a preferred communica- various locations or to external databases. One tion medium for equivocal and ambiguous mes- study suggests that graduate business class- sages (EI-Shinnaway and Markus, 1992), and rooms should be information-intensive environ- once a work group is familiar with a topic, e-mail ments containing such features as online is preferred to face-to-face communication access to real-world data available from com- (Zack, 1993). mercial providers, access to company-specific 1995 276 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learing databases, access to a wide varietyof software an informationresource to be utilized during for data manipulationand analysis and so on class to allow students to search for information (King,et al., 1990). The CATTsystem (Hashim, relevantto a course topic seems immense, and et al., 1991), developed to complementthe case research examininguses of the Internet and the teaching method, features current information World WideWeb is much needed. from publiclyavailable databases such as ag- The hypermediaformatis expected to encour- gregate industrial annual data, U.S. census age thinking, speculation, and personal judg- data, and NYSE and AMEXdaily returns.Using ments on the part of the learner because the such data, students are able to develop and learneris responsiblefor organizingand analyz- analyze alternativesto the case problem.Infact, ing information (Ambrose, 1991). On the one one study demonstrates that graduatebusiness hand, hypermediacould be considered the ulti- student groups that had access to publicly avail- mate tool for a cognitive information processing able financial informationvia computers per- theorist:"because hypertextis a node-linksys- formedsignificantly betterin case analyses than tem based uponsemanticstructures opposed [as study groups that had to analyze the same to a sequential access system] hypermediacan cases withoutaccess to such information (King, map fairlydirectlythe structureof knowledge it et al., 1990). Examples at lowereducationallev- is presenting"(Ambrose, 1991); on the other els of learning networks include Video for Ex- hand, for students withvery littleworkingknowl- ploringthe World,which gives quick access to edge in a domain, the seeming lack of struc- data such as humanand animalmotion,and the ture may be disconcerting and may hinder Jason project, which gives students access to processing. data being gathered by underwaterexplorers (Rubin,1993).8 Simulation Technologies and Virtual Reality: Simulation technology is anothermediumof the Learning networks are linked to the construc- information classroom. Simulation providea can tivist model of learning:students are construct- condensed or vicariousexperience and is based ing new knowledge from existing information on the belief that students learn best when they sources. There is no single correctinterpretation rather experience the subject or topic. For instance, nor answer to be given by the instructor; the students formtheirown ideas fromthe infor- groups of students using computersimulations have been foundto outperform controlgroups in mationthey gatherand explore. problem-solvingtasks (Gorrell and Downing, Hypermedia: Hypermedia providesa non-linear 1989). An example of a simulationis a com- means of browsingand sortingthroughcomput- puter-assisted internationalnegotiation project erized information. Learning networkscan be or- (Torney-Purta, 1993) in which teams of five-12 ganized in a hypermediaformatto encourage college students role-play diplomats from an- students to search the materialin the manner other countryand negotiate international issues that suits their own system of logic. One of the throughthe use of a computer-networking sys- features of the Universityof Maryland's AT&T tem. Students acquire practice in higher-order Teaching Theater is the use of hypermediato thinkingabout social issues, in defending their display lecture notes (Norman,1992). Students positions, and in defending their ideas. Simula- can navigate throughmaterial duringclass while tions are based on the constructivistmodel of the instructoris giving a lecture. Perhaps the learning-that learners need to be actively in- most widely knownhypermedia tool in academic volved in learningby workingwith real-lifefacts circles is the WorldWide Web, used by both in- or objects. structorsand students to engage in information Virtualrealityis another information classroom seeking and analysis. Althoughwe are unaware technology. Virtualrealityprovides "panoramic" of research that examines the potentialof the World Wide Web in the context of classroom presentations in three dimensions to the eyes, ears, and hands of a user. One example is a analyses, the potentialof the Web to serve as Britishhigh school that introduced design of the 8 The May 1993 issue of the Communications the ACM of a virtualcity where differentlanguages are spo- Classrooms in contains several examples of Information ken to teach foreign languages (Kerney,1993). elementary secondaryeducation. and This gives the course a more realistic context 1995 277 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning than would be possible through any other tion. Studies indicatean increase in participation means aside from sending the students to the in classes taught using electronic peer-to-peer country.Otherproposed applicationsincludevir- communication. The technology encourages all tual realityfor use in historywhereby students members of the class to contribute class dis- to could create a virtualrealityEgyptiancity where cussion (Bump, 1990). A typical session in a they can enter, "walk" through, and discourse class enrolling 18 undergraduates involved with ancient Egyptians,for use in medical edu- more than 100 messages contributed 18 par- by cation whereby students could workon medical ticipants. Approximately60 percent were ad- emergencies in a virtualhospital, or for use in dressed by students to other students rather science whereby students could create and visit than to the instructor(Slatin, 1990). Ina two-day a virtualsolar system withplanets correctin ap- period, in the English Department'selectronic pearance, relative size, and distance from the classroom at the University Texas, 200 elec- of sun (Kerney,1993). tronic comments were made of which only 10 Virtualreality is based on the assumption that percent were teacher comments. Twenty-eight the most effective learningis thatwhich is expe- percentof the studentcomments (comprising 90 riential,or based on actual experience in a con- percent of the total)were student to student, 61 text that is similarto where learninghas to be percent were directed toward the whole class, later applied. A virtualrealityenvironmentsup- and only 13 percent were of the student to teacher or teacher to student variety (Butler, ports constructivist,cooperative,and sociocultu- ral learning: in designing the virtual reality, 1990). students are actively involved in constructing their knowledge of the particulardomain for Groupware-SupportedSynchronous which the virtualrealityis being built.Students Communication work together to construct the virtualworld by contributing their own views of how the reality in Similarly, synchronous communicationclass- should operate (much of which willbe based on rooms using groupware,students collaborating and theirown values, understanding, culture). with the technology were found to have higher perceived levels of skill development, higher perceived learning,and higher perceived inter- Communication Technology Classrooms est than students collaboratingin a classroom without electronic support (Alavi, 1994). In a Informatingdown can also be achieved with similarstudy reportedin this issue, Alavi, et al. communication-intensive classrooms. An elec- tronic classroom built around communication (1995) added groups that were comprised of students from two differentuniversities(distant technology can be as simple as providing elec- tronicmail to facilitatepeer-to-peercommunica- groups). They compared their satisfaction, per- ceived learning climate, and performance to tion to as complex as CATT (mentionedabove), which, in addition to the information features groups of students fromthe same university(lo- cal groups) engaged in three one-hour-and-fif- previously mentioned, incorporatesgroupware teen-minute collaborative learning sessions to facilitatecase discussions outside the physi- cal boundariesof a classroom (Rathnam,et al., using groupware-supported synchronous com- munication technology. The study concluded 1992). Such groupware-supported facilities that the distant groups perceived a more posi- mightalso be equippedwithsoftwareto provide tive learningclimate and performedbetter on a structureto the conversation. multiplechoice test of learning but that there was no significant difference in satisfaction Synchronous Communication Classrooms measures. The only complaintreceived in an- othergroupwarefacility was the lack of structure Synchronous communicationclassrooms pro- (Jessup, 1993). Some groupware-supported vide computers on student desks that are net- classrooms embed structureto facilitateconver- worked with software such as Lotus Notes, sation and reduce informationoverload (e.g., enablingsimultaneouspeer-to-peercommunica- and CATT EXEMPLAR). 1995 278 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning Research at anothersynchronous communication dustry (Schein, 1992). The role of hierarchy classroomexaminedwhethertechnology-enabled would change in that distributed information collaborative learninginvolving case analyses is would make local problemsolving and lateralin- superior to individual constructive learninginvolv- formation sharing much more feasible. ITwould ing individual case analyses. The goal of both make it possible for an organization be simul- to these methodswas to increasestudentinterestin taneously centralizedaroundbasic strategy and the course, increase studentunderstanding the of goals and decentralizedaround implementation and material, promote criticalthinking (Leidner and and control. Power and authoritywould shift Fuller,1995). Studentsengaged in eight 1.5-hour away from position and status toward knowl- case analyses duringthe course of the semester. edge and information, leadershipwould be- and The study foundthat studentsworking collabora- come less of a role and more of a "function"; tivelyvia anonymousgroupware eithersmallor in more emphasis would fall on groups and team- largegroupswere more interestedin the material work. In the context of education, the vision to and perceivedthemselves to learnmorethanstu- transformwould involve using IT (1) to redraw dents who worked individually. study also The the physical boundariesof the classroom, (2) to found that students who workedindividually out- enable more teamwork,(3) to allow learningto performed students who collaborated small or in be a continuoustime-independent process, and large groups. This may suggest that thoughcol- (4) to enable multi-level,multi-speedknowledge laborating, students were not processingand as- creation. The notion of virtuallearning spaces similatingthe information; though exposed to a begins to operationalize these assumptions. diversity ideas, theydidnotincorporate ideas of the Virtuallearningspaces are those that linkgeo- intotheirown cognitive framework. merits This fur- therresearchbecause a primary of communi- graphically dispersed students withno time con- goal straints. Virtual learning spaces sustain cationtechnologyclassroomsis notjustto expose discourse throughinterruptions across dis- and studentsto more ideas, butto enablethemto criti- tances and give it continuity over time callyevaluatea diversity ideas in the creation of of (Scaradamaliaand Bereiter, 1993). Hence, we their of own interpretation important issues. distinguish between informatingdown class- The pedagogical assumptions underlyingsyn- rooms that can allow students to engage in col- chronouscommunication classrooms are that(1) laborativesessions across distances when the participation criticalto universitylearning,(2) is collaborativesessions are time-controlled (such lack of participation primarily is attributable to as with the Alavi, et al. (1995) work previously student inhibitions abouttalkinginfrontof others, mentioned)from virtuallearningspaces where (3) anonymitywill allow students to freely ex- the communication forms the basis of the press themselves and overcometheirinhibitions, course itself and is conducted at will-when the and (4) synchronous communicationtechnolo- students want and for as long as they want. Vir- gies providean efficientmechanismforproviding tual learningspaces can exist to allow a group anonymity. The firstassumptionmaps closely to of students withinthe same course to communi- the cooperative model of learningespecially if, cate at will(as withthe CATT system) or to bring for practicalreasons, the class is divided into together students from various courses at vari- smallerdiscussion groups. The thirdassumption ous universities worktogether. to can arguably be used to enable sociocultural learning.By providing anonymity and non-verbal communication, different culturesare allowed to express themselves withouthavingto adopt the Asynchronous Communication Across languageor opinionsof the dominating culture. Distances The simplest virtual learning spaces are founded on electronicmail and electronic bulle- A vision to transform: virtual tin boards. Press (1993) considers e-mail a low- continuous learningspaces tech innovationthat can have a radicalimpact The ITvision to transform the basis for a com- is on curriculum, commutingpatterns,frequencyof class meetings, and student-instructorroles. An plete transformation an organizationand in- of example of an asynchronouscommunication vir- MISQuarterly/September 1995 279
Modelsof Learning tual learningspace is a graduateeducationclass Table 3 shows the linkages between the tech- taught at the University Texas. The students of nologies and the models of learning. No vision meet in a classroom only three times duringthe of technology is more desirable than others. semester.The rest of the course takes place using Rather, the most appropriatetechnology de- asynchronouselectronicmail.The discussionsvia pends on the underlyingmodel of learningthat electronicmail were not only multi-level (several the instructorwishes to employ. themes being discussed) butalso multispeed (dif- We have not investigated the specific course ferentaspects of a theme beingaddressed by dif- content and student characteristicsto which the ferent participants)(Harris, 1993). In another variousvisions may be most appropriate. Future project and (Knoll Jarvenpaa, 1995),studentsfrom researchers can addess these issues. For ex- over 10 universitiesfromnearlyall continents are teamed up to work in globallydispersed virtual ample, in the domainof business education,de- teams. Forsix weeks, the studentscompleteteam cision-making skills including analytical and problem-solving skills and communicationskills assignmentswithout face-to-facecontactwith any are seen as critical.We mightthereforespecu- their team members using electronicmail and late that methods requiring interactionand stu- computerconferencingtechnologies.An example dent involvement would be preferred over in secondary education is geographicallydis- traditionalmethods. Thus, the informating or up persed teams of studentsworking togetherto ac- tasks associatedwithscience projects or transforming technologies with the correspond- complish environmental studies(Hawkins, ing collaborativeor constructivistlearningmod- 1993). els might be ways to improve the quality of business education. Groupware-SupportedAsynchronous Communication Across Distances Groupware-supported communication class- rooms when designed for students to access from remote terminalscan also become virtual The Taxonomy of the Impact learningspaces. Anonymity be builtin or the can of ITon Learning identitiesof the group may be known.The addi- tion of the groupwareto the asynchronouscom- The previous discussion of the relationshipbe- to municationacross distances purports provide tween technologyand learningsuggests the fol- structuring mechanisms to the exchange of lowingtaxonomy (see Figure2). The taxonomy messages in orderto help learnersorganizethe suggests the impactof the fourclasses of learn- information they share. ing technologies on two process dimensions: (1) controlof the pace and content of learning The main pedagogical assumptionof the virtual and (2) the purpose of instruction(knowledge learning space is that learning is a process of or dissemination knowledgecreation). The taxon- workingtoward a more complete and coherent omy also suggests possible impacts of the vi- understanding.The flow of information must al- sions on a numberof well-established learning low for progressive work in a problem, with outcomes from education research (see Table ideas remainingactive over extended periodsof 4). IS researchers should find it useful to draw time. Furthermore, learningis viewed as ongo- upon well-established variables from education ing and need not occur as single well-defined research ratherthan creating new variables as topics covered in a finiteperiodsuch as duringa they pursue research in the area. Althougha re- class period. In this way, the virtuallearning view of the educationalresearch comparingthe space supportscognitive,constructivist, collabo- effectiveness of the models is beyond the scope rative,and sociocultural learningmodels. of this paper, Table4 lists the learningoutcome variables that typicallyform the foundation of educational methodologyresearch. Most of the Summary research discussed thus far examines one or Table 2 summarizes the technologies and the more of these learningoutcome variables;they are summarizedhere for convenient reference. assumptions discussed above. Examining leamingoutcomevariables well-defined 1995 280 MISQuarterly/September
Models of Learning Table 2. Electronic Classroom Types, Assumptions, and Related Models of Learning Electronic Classroom Type Principal Pedagogical Assumptions The Vision to Automate InstructorConsole Instructorthe center of the classroom activity. Presentation technologies can make the delivery of information more memorable and interesting. Instructor Console and Stand-Alone Students learn better if they can emulate what the instructor is doing Student Computers on the computer. Learning is more effective when it is interactive. Computer-Assisted Learning Students benefit when they control the pace of learning. Feedback should be frequent. Distance Learning Weakness in education is the lack of availability of good courses and faculty. Accessibility in remote locations or smaller schools can be efficiently provided via telecommunications. The Vision to Informate Up Key Response Pads The instructor needs feedback. The abilityto elicit responses via technology is superior to hand-raising. Instructor-Student E-mail Feedback, even delayed, is better than no feedback. Limited access to instructors limits communication. The Vision to Informate Down Learning Networks Delivery of information is not a pressing problem, but rather the lack of current informationfrom realistic contexts. Students create knowledge through information exploration. Hypermedia/Internet Students need to create their own knowledge structures. Simulation/VirtualReality The more real the context, the more effective the learning. Students should be provided the means to experience the phenomenon during class. Synchronous Communication Participation is critical to the learning process. Classrooms Anonymity encourages participation. Groupware-Supported Synchronous Structure imposed on communication is effective in helping students Communication Classrooms learn. Communication is more efficient when structured. The Vision to Transform Virtual Continuous Learning Spaces Asynchronous Communication Learning is an ongoing process. Across Distances Time should be flexible. Learning need not be geographically dependent. Groupware-Supported Asynchronous Ad hoc communication is more effective when supported with a Communication Across Distances structure. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 281
Modelsof Learning Table 3. Technology Fit With the Theories of Learning Objectivist Constructivist Collaborative CognitiveIP Sociocultural The Vision to Automate Instructor Console xx Instructor Console and Stand- xx x Alone StudentComputers Computer-Assisted Learning XX Distance Learning XX The Vision to InformateUp Key Response Pads XX X E-mail Instructor-Student The Vision to InformateDown Learning Networks XX Hypermedia/Internet XX XX SimulationNirtual Reality XX SynchronousCommunication XX x Classrooms Synchro- Groupware-Supported XX XX X Classrooms nous Communication The Vision to Transform AsynchronousCommunication XX X Across Distances Asynchronous Groupware-Supported XX i XX AcrossDistances Communication match; X representsa secondarymatch XXrepresentsthe primary 1995 282 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning as dependent measures in studies of the impact tor of the knowledge. Rather,students develop of IT-facilitatedlearning will promote greater shared tacit knowledgefrom existing explicitin- and of comparability interpretability findings. formation.The structureis thus a ringstructure where the students become a very important Technologiesservingthe automation function are partof the knowledge creation process and the closely aligned with objectivisttheory, in which instructorserves as a mediator rather than a case the instructor remainsthe centerof attention and in controlof the learningprocess. The struc- dictator of the learning process; students will tureof the class can be describedas a knowledge therefore learn more/less depending on their tree or knowledgehierarchy, the instructor with as own contributionto the knowledge creation the creatorof knowledge.The instructor transfers process. Technologiesthat informatedown are most properlyused in a constructiveor collabo- explicitknowledgeto studentswho are expected rative environment,with an emphasis on con- to be able to applythe knowledge. automation The visionpromotesthe efficient of transfer knowledge ceptual learningand higher-order thinking. can It even be arguedthat such technologies woulddo thoughleavingthe processingof the knowledge by littlemore than frustratelearnersin an objective students as well as the creationof knowledgeby instructors unchanged.Therefore, impact IT the of environment-forcing them to search for the on learning limited an ephemeral is to effecton the rightanswer when it would be easier to be told. self-variables.Nevertheless, where the goal of The potentialexists for a longer-termeffect on educationis factual/procedural the self-variablessince the controlhas been al- knowledge transfer, the vision to automatecan be effectiveand per- most entirelyshiftedto the learner. formanceimproved.9 Lastly,technologies with the potentialto trans- formeducationwere discussed. Such technolo- Technologiesthat informateup similarly function to assist the instructor the nucleus of class as gies demand a rethinking the purpose of the of activitybut also functionto improvethe informa- physical classroom facilities. The transforma- tion an instructorreceives concerning student tionalvision is enabled by communication tech- comprehension of material.The structurecan nologies that allow individualsto share tacit be described as a star,withthe instructor the as knowledge in a manner uninhibitedby time or center but receivinginputfromthe students. The location.Of all the visions presented, the vision to transformgives the greatest amount of con- purpose of instruction still focused on knowl- is trol over the learning process to the learners. edge dissemination, but recognitionis given to This demands extensive preparation the part the importanceof ensuring understanding in- or on ternalization the material.Controlof the pace of of the instructor-even more than the other vi- and content of instruction still held by the in- is sions-to develop materialsappropriate such for structor.As with the vision to automate, there a learningenvironmentand to monitorthe pro- may be temporaryeffects on the self-variables gress being made in the discussions as an ob- as well as improvementsin factual and proce- server and as a guide. Knowledge is not durallearning,but achievingconceptuallearning constructed from existing explicit sources but and higher-orderthinkingin an informating-up rathercreated fromthe tacit knowledge held by environment individualsparticipating part of a dynamic as may be difficult. structure.The tacit knowledgeof the individuals Technologiesthat informate down place muchof comprising the class is shared, and a new the controlof the contentand pace of learningin shared tacit knowledge emerges among the the hands of students. The purpose of instruc- members. The structureis dynamicin the sense tion moves away fromknowledgedissemination that different members have more or less impor- toward knowledge creation; however, much of tance at differentperiods of time depending on the knowledge is already created (is explicit), the amount and qualityof the tacit knowledge but the instructor no longer the primary is crea- they have to contributeto the knowledge crea- tion of the entire group. Such a vision enables 9 Thus, to the extent that effective performance definedby is higher-order cognitionand conceptual learning. the goal of learning, the taxonomy does not predict Itis this vision thatdemands the greatest shiftin differencesin performance across the visions(although there the roles of instructorsand students and may willbe different types of performance across the visions). meet withresistance on the partsof both. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 283
t, o co 0 a) Automating Informating Up Informating Down Transformin CD Technology InstructorConsole Keypad Response Learning Networks Virtual Lear CAI/CB1 Instnictor-Studenteinail Virtual Reality (b Distance Learning Simulations tr InstructorConsole ,ad Student Workstations Commnunications Classrooms CD Classroom -k Structure Hierarchy/Tree Star Ring Dynamic co COl Model Objective Objective, Cognitive IP I Constructive, Cognitive IP Collaborativ Collaborative I Sociocultura PROCESS DIMENSIONS Instructor Control of Pace, Content Knowledge Purpose of Instruction Dissemination 4 OUTCOME DIMENSIONS Ephemeral Impact on Self-Variables (motivation, interest, self-efficacy) Factual/Procedural Impact on Levels of Learning ,4- Lower-order Impact on Cognition Thinking ^ Low Impact on Behavior--participation and attention Improvementson Impact on Behavior--performance factual/procedural ts Figure 2. Taxonomy of the Impact of ITon Learning
Modelsof Learning Table 4. Educational Method Research Variables Self-Variables References Self-efficacy The degree to whicha studentfeels capable of learning Cennamo,et al., 1991 froma given method. Grusec, 1992 Martoochie Webster, & Affective The degree of satisfactionwithand interestin learning 1992 froma given method. Hidi,1990 Baldwin Kar,1987 and Motivation The degree to whicha studentis motivated a by method. particular Learning Levels Context The basis of course material, dividedaccording typically Walberg&Haertel,1992 and to factual,procedural, conceptual. Tennyson, 1992 Davidson,1990 LearningStyle mode of learning, psychological The preferred a Bostrom,et al., 1990 measure. Hambree,1992 Fourqurean, al., 1990 et Cognitive ThinkingLevel Higher-order versus lower-order thinking thinking. Tenebaum,1982 1983 Bruning, Strategies strategiesused by studentsto learn. The metacognitive Walberg&Haertel,1992 The ability learnersto identify strategies of the necessary for understanding performing and tasks. Processing The amountand frequencywithwhichstudents process Tobias, 1982 new information. Bovy, 1981 Behavioral Performance A surrogatemeasure of the amountof learning. Attention A measure of directednon-verbal participation. Bostrom,et al., 1990 Participation The amountof usuallyverbalparticipation. Future Research Challenges search tradition in IS, and certainly learning envi- ronments provide an excellent opportunity to in- Numerous challenges remain in the area of im- corporate such technologies. This field of provements to management education, many of research deserves thorough attention, especially which require effort from IT researchers inter- such questions as whether structuring mecha- ested in educational environments. In reviewing nisms when incorporated into communication the literature on IT in education and developing classrooms facilitate information processing by the taxonomy presented in Figure 2, several ar- students or obstruct knowledge creation by forc- eas in need of research present themselves and ing consensus. However, avenues for other IT- are briefly discussed below. based methods to informate up or down should 1. Research is needed on technologies also be undertaken. In particular,attention needs that to be given to developing technologies to support informate down and up. informating up. This is the area that has been Research at the university level thus far has fo- given the least attention so far. It will be interest- cused primarily on the technologies to support ing to understand how communication patterns informating down via collaborative learning. are altered when e-mail is widely used between Collaborative technologies have a strong re- instructors and students and how to effectively MISQuarterly/September 1995 285
Modelsof Learning use key response-pad technology to provide models of learning. Some studies of collabora- real-time feedback on students' learning. tive learning in a virtual learning space have supported the point that for mature, motivated learners this mode of learning can be more ef- 2. Research is needed on technology appli- fective than the traditional classroom, but for cations to promote sociocultural learning. less motivated and mature learners, the effect is Papert (1984) lamented in 1984 that few were the opposite (Hiltz, 1988; Singer, et al., 1988). looking for ways to use the computer to allow Students lacking the necessary basic skills and knowledge to be acquired and presented in a self-discipline may do better in a traditionallyde- form that matched different cultural and person- livered mode (Hiltz, 1988). Aside from these ality types. Little has changed since. There is a findings, little is known about the prerequisites need to discover ways to use information tech- to the effective application of informating down, nology to enable sociocultural learning-to im- informating up, and transformational technolo- merse students in the context of the material, yet gies in learning environments. It could well be enabling them to communicate and contribute that the brightest and most motivated students their own ideas and values based upon their own will prefer to learn in an individual competitive culture. These goals well support the multicultural environment rather than sharing their knowledge objectives to which many universities subscribe. with less motivated, less bright students. 3. Research is needed on the added value of In his theory of knowledge creation in organiza- technology to the learning models. tions, Nonaka (1994) suggests several enabling conditions of knowledge creation: creative It may be that merely augmenting the objec- tivist model with constructivist models will pro- chaos, autonomy, redundancy of information, duce the greatest learning impact and that requisite variety and intention. Nonaka suggests that without some form of shared experience, it technology changes will only contribute minor is extremely difficult for people to share each improvements. On the other hand, information others' thinking processes. This model of knowl- technology might serve as a catalyst and rein- forcer for effective applications of non-tradi- edge creation (called socialization) parallels the sociocultural model of learning. Nonaka further tional learning models. Consequently, future research needs to compare the effectiveness of suggests that the quality of an individual's contri- bution is determined by the "variety"of that indi- information technology incorporated into the vidual's experience. Bovy (1981) advances the model of learning versus the model without notion that high-ability students profit from the technology (rather than comparing one model of learning with technology to a different model opportunity to process information in their own of learning with or without technology). Such in- way and to create knowledge, whereas low-abil- ity students tend to be handicapped by such vestigations are encouraged to build on pre- vious work and as much as possible use empowerment. In addition, student reticence ob- served in traditional settings may be more the variables such as those listed in Table 4 that result of indolence rather than communication have been the center of much previous edu- inhibitions, in which case attempts to encourage cational methodology research. knowledge creation via teamwork, collaborative 4. Research is needed on the influence of learning models, and communication technolo- moderating variables on the learning gies might meet with insurmountable obstacles. models and their technological The lack of enabling conditions such as student enhancements. experience, student ability, and student effort The second section presented five models of may outweigh any gains to be achieved with learning but did not advance any model as the technology and thus should be examined before widespread investment in advanced technology. preferred model because the appropriate choice In addition, the instructor's skills in executing the depends on many factors such as course con- tent and student characteristics. There is little learning models and in adopting technology research that elaborates on the factors that enabling the models should be taken into ac- count before investing in the technologies. might affect the successful application of the 1995 286 MISQuarterly/September
Modelsof Learning 5. Research is needed concerning the most ations to the learning experience. This also effective ways to foster teamwork as well as means that individual students will have differing the appropriate size and duration of teams. learning objectives and experiences, and there- fore, the assessment strategies must be both in- Teamwork is an implicit aspect of the collabora- dividualized and dynamic. Individual student tive and sociocultural models. In order to stimu- late creative thinking via discussion in a team, learning portfolios are increasingly used in such an environment (Becker, 1987). several conditions should exist: the dialectic should be multi-faceted rather than single-fac- In the virtual learning environment, the instructor eted, individuals should be able to express their provides visions for directions, orients the cha- ideas freely and candidly, and there should be otic situation that results from multiple individu- temporal continuity so as not to disrupt the crea- als simultaneously creating and sharing tion of knowledge (Nonaka, 1994). This suggests knowledge, and sets the deadline by which the a need for multiple channels of communica- visions will be realized. Effective instruction in tion-some continuous and a few anonymous. this context might mean asking the proper ques- Given the need for shared experiences, teams tions rather than guiding students toward the might remain stable over time and across proper responses, facilitating the sharing of in- courses even though the importance of the formation to enable knowledge to be con- members' contributions will vary depending on structed rather than constructing and distributing their existing knowledge. knowledge themselves, and monitoring rather than leading the knowledge creation process. Teamwork is a means of knowledge creation rather than an end in itself. Research needs to Students are likely to resist the new learning consider optimal team size, team leadership is- models as much as the instructors. In the virtual sues, team assessment strategies, and the im- learning space, students are as much responsi- pact of the longevity of the teamwork. Research ble for the quality and amount of learning as the also needs to consider the effects of teamwork instructor. Students accustomed to objective as- on the satisfaction of the learners. The studies sessment and clear topics may be unable to ad- on satisfaction must include virtual global stu- just to the additional responsibility placed on dent teams (e.g., Knoll and Jarvenpaa, 1995), them. This too demands student willingness to where members often come from different edu- forfeit the certainty of objective performance- cational institutions with differing educational based testing procedures for course assess- goals and assessment strategies and must con- ment procedures revolving around student sider the amount of the knowledge the learner contribution to the class. This is a fundamentally has to contribute versus the knowledge the different way for students to think about a learner gains from the sharing process. course; traditionally,students are accustomed to 6. Research is needed on understanding the thinking in terms of what they get out of a course rather than what they contribute to the roles of instructors and students as well as the appropriate knowledge created in a course. learning assessment strategies in virtual learning spaces. As one moves along the continuum in Figure 2, the classroom model becomes a ring or dy- namic topology with major implications for the Conclusion roles of students and instructors and also for as- As an examination of the models of learning and sessment, both of instructors and students. In of the impact of IT on learning elucidates, there virtual learning spaces, it is not known at the are varieties of opportunities for implementing IT outset exactly what knowledge will be acquired in management education. Technology can be and created. The virtual classroom thus pro- used to facilitate the display of information, to in- motes "creative chaos" (Nonaka, 1994), remov- crease access to external explicit information, ing traditional structure from the learning and to increase the sharing and construction of environment. The removal of structure means knowledge. By studying the interactions of the that individual students will have differing prepa- technology with learning models, as well as the MISQuarterly/September 1995 287
Modelsof Learning individual technologies themselves, a picture Bostrom, R.P., Olfman,L., Sein, M.K."The Im- begins to emerge as to what constitutesalterna- portanceof Learning Style in End-UserTrain- tive implementations ITin education.Technol- of ing,"MIS Quarterly (14:1), March 1990, pp. ogy is not suggested as a panacea for 101-119. educational problems;in fact many problemsin Bovy, R.C. "SuccessfulInstructional Methods:A educationare social ratherthan learningrelated. CognitiveInformation Processing Approach," Yet, technology can enable the effectiveapplica- ECTJ(29:4), Winter1981, pp. 203-217. tion of constructive,cognitive,collaborative, and Briggs, R.O. and Ramose, V. "An Empirical sociocultural models of learning. Study of Classroom Dynamics Using Exem- plar,an ElectronicLearning SupportEnviron- ment Based on Cognitive LearningTheory," Acknowledgements workingpaper,MISDepartment, Universityof The authors are grateful for the helpful com- Arizona,Tucson,AZ,July 14, 1992. ments of the senior editor,the associate editor, Briggs, R.O., Ramose, V., Bass, K., and Car- and the reviewers. The authors are likewise lisle, J.P. "Exemplar: Improvingthe College Classroom with GroupSupportTechnology," gratefulto MarillaSvinickifor her comments on in Proceedings of the Thirteenth AnnualInter- learningtheories. Lastly,the authorsare grateful nationalConferenceon Information for travelfundinggiven by the BaylorCenterfor Systems, EducationTechnology. J. DeGross, J. Becker, and J. Elam (eds.), December 1992, p. 276 (availablefromAsso- ciationfor Computing Machinery, New York). Bruning, I.L. "An InformationProcessing Ap- References proach to a Theory of Instruction," ECTJ (31:2), Summer1983, pp. 91-101. Alavi, M. "Computer-Mediated Collaborative Bump,J. "Radical Changes in Class Discussion Learning: An Empirical Evaluation,"MIS Using Networked Computers,"working pa- Quarterly (18:2), June 1994, pp. 159-174. per, Department of English, University of Alavi, M., Wheeler,B.C., and Valacich,J.S. "Us- Texas,Austin,TX,1990. ing ITto Reengineer Business Education: An Butler,W. "TheConstruction Knowledgein an of Exploratory Investigation of Collaborative Electronic Discourse Community," working Telelearning," MIS Quarterly (10:3), Septem- of paper, Department English,The University ber 1995. of Texas,Austin,TX, 1990. Ambrose, D.W. "The Effects of Hypermedia on Carrier,C.A. and Sales, G.C. "Pairversus Indi- Learning: A LiteratureReview,"Educational vidualWorkon the Acquisition Concepts in of Technology,December 1991, pp. 51-55. a Computer-Based Instructional Lesson," Bagley, C. and Hunter,B. "Restructuring, Con- Journal of Computer Based Instruction structivism,and Technology:Forginga New (14:1), 1987, pp. 11-17. Relationship," Educational Technology,July Cennamo, K.S., Saveny, W.C., and Smith, P.L. 1992, pp. 22-27. "Mental Effort and Video-Based Learning: BaldwinT. and Kar, K. "The Developmentand The Relationshipof Preconceptions and the EmpiricalTest of a Measure for Assessing Effects of Interactiveand Covert Practice," Motivation Learn in Management Educa- to Educational TechnologyResearch and De- tion,"in Academy of ManagementBest Pa- velopment(39:1), 1991, pp. 5-16. per Proceedings, F. Hoy (ed.), Academy of Clark,R.C. "Defining 'D'in ISD:Part2: Task- the Management, New Orleans, LA, 1987, pp. Specific Instructional Methods," Performance 117-121. and InstructionJoumal, April1986, pp. 12-17. Becker, H.J. "Using Computerfor Instruction," Clark, R.E. "When Researchers Swim Up- Byte, February1987, pp. 149-162. stream:Reflections an Unpopular on Argument Benbasat, I. and Dexter,A.S. "AnExperimental About Learning from Media," Educational Evaluationof Graphicaland Color-Enhanced Technology, February 1991, pp. 34-40. Information Presentation," ManagementSci- Davidson, G.V. "Matching LearningStyles with ence (31:11),November1985, pp. 1348-1364. TeachingStyles: Is it a Useful Concept in In- 288 MIS 1995 Quarterly/September
Modelsof Learning struction?" Performance and InstructionJour- The Harbus News. "PMD Program Gets Ad- nal, April 1990, pp. 36-38. vanced Multimedia Computer Network," stu- DeSanctis, G. "Computer Graphics as Decision dent newspaper of Harvard Business School Aids: Directions for Research," Decision Sci- (LVIII:111),Monday, April 11, 1994, pp. 1, 11. ences (15:2), 1984, pp. 463-487. Harris, J.B. "An Internet-based Graduate Tele- EI-Shinnaway, M.M. and Markus, M.L. "Media computing Course: Practicing What We Richness Theory and New Electronic Com- Preach," in Technology and Teacher Educa- munication Media: A Study of Voice Mail and tion Annual 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Electronic Mail," in Proceedings of the Thir- Willis, and J. Willis (eds.), Charlottesville, VA, teenth International Conference on Informa- 1993, pp. 641-645. tion Systems, J. DeGross, J. Becker, and J. Hashim, S., Rathnam, S., and Whinston, A.B. Elam (eds.), December 1992, pp. 91-106 "CATT: Argumentation Based Groupware An (available from Association for Computing System for Enhancing Case Discussions in Machinery, New York). Business Schools," Proceedings of the Fisher, C.G. and Grant, G.E. "IntellectualLevels Twelfth Annual International Conference on in College Classrooms," in Studies of College Information Systems, J. DeGross, I. Ben- Teaching: Experimental Results, Theoretical basat, G. Desanctis, and C. Beath (eds.), Interpretations, and New Perspectives, C.L. 1991, pp. 371-385 (available form Associa- Ellner and C.P. Barnes (eds.), D.C. Heath tion for Computing Machinery, New York). and Co., Lexington, MA, 1983, pp. 47-60. Hawkins, J. "Technology and the Organization of Flynn, J.L. "Cooperative Learning and Gagne's Schooling," Communications of the ACM Events of Instruction: A Syncretic View,"Edu- (36:5), May 1993, pp. 30-34. cational Technology, October 1992, pp. 53- Hidi, S. "Interest and Its Contribution as a Men- 60. tal Resource for Learning,"Review of Educa- Fourqurean, J.M., Meisgeier, C., and Swank, P. tional Research (60:4), Winter 1990, pp. "The Link Between Learning Style and 549-571. Jungian Psychological Type: A Finding of Hiltz, S.R. "Collaborative Learning in a Virtual Two Bipolar Preference Dimensions," Journal Classroom: Highlights of Findings," in Pro- of Experimental Education, Spring 1990, pp. ceedings of the Conference on Computer- 225-237. Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, OR, Garvin, D.A. "Buildinga Learning Organization," September 26-28, 1988 (available through Harvard Business Review, July-August 1993, Association for Computing Machinery, New pp. 78-91. York). Gist, T.E., McQuade, M.K., Swanson, R.E., Horowitz, H. "Student Response Systems: Inter- Lorenzen, G.L., Schmidt, S.R., Boudot, J.R., activity in a Classroom Environment," pre- and Fuller, R.G. "The Air Force Academy In- sented at Sixth Conference of Interactive tructor Workstation (IWS): II. Effectiveness," Instruction Technology for the Society of Ap- Journal of Educational Technology Systems plied Learning Technology, Portland, OR, (17:4), 1988-89, pp. 285-295. February 24, 1988. Gorrell, J. and Downing, H. "Effects of Com- Iran-Nejad, A., McKeachie, W., and Berliner, puter-Simulated Behavior Analysis on Pre- D.C. "The Multisource Nature of Learning: An Service Teacher's Problem Solving," Journal Introduction," Review of Educational Re- of Educational Computing Research (5:3), search (60:4), Winter 1990, pp. 509-515. 1989, pp. 335-347. Janda, K. "Teaching American Government in Grusec, J.E. "Social Learning Theory and Devel- an Electronic Classroom," presented at 85th opmental Psychology: The Legacies of Robert Annual Meeting of the American Political Sci- Sears and Albert Bandura," Developmental ence Association, Atlanta, GA, August 31- Psychology (28:5), 1992, pp. 776-786. September 3, 1989). Hambree, R. "Experiments and Relational Stud- Jessup, L.M. "IntegratingGroup Support System ies in Problem Solving: A Meta-Analysis," Research and Development with Instruction: Journal for Research in Mathematics Educa- Students Learn by Building a GSS Facility," tion (23:3), 1992, pp. 242-273. working paper, Information Systems Depart- MISQuarterly/September 1995 289
Models Learning of ment, CaliforniaState University,San Mar- Educational Psychology (82:2), 1990, pp. cos, CA, 1993. 189-200. Jonassen, D.H. "Thinking Technology,"Educa- Neter, J. and Chervany, N. "Effectsof Use of tional Technology,January1993, pp. 35-37. Computerin FirstYear Statistics on Student Kerney,C.A. "HowSoon WillTeachers Use Vir- Attitudes," Decision Sciences (4:1), 1973, pp. tual Reality in the Classroom?"Technology 133-141. and Teacher Education Annual 1993, D. Nonaka, I. "ADynamicTheoryof Organizational Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Willis, and J. Willis Knowledge Creation,"OrganizationScience (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. 178- (5:1), February1994, pp. 14-37. 181. Norman,K. L. "The ElectronicTeaching Thea- King, W.R., Premkumar, and Ramamurthy, G., ter: InteractiveHypermedia and MentalMod- K. "An Evaluationof the Role and Perform- els of the Classroom,"CurrentPsychology ance of a Decision SupportSystem in Busi- Research & Reviews (9:2), Summer 1992, ness Education,"Decision Sciences (21:3), pp. 141-161. 1990, pp. 642-659. M. O'Loughlin, "Rethinking Science Education: Knoll,K. and Jarvenpaa,S.L. "Learning Work to Beyond Piagetian Constructivism Toward a in DistributedGlobalTeams,"Proceedings of SocioculturalModel of Teaching and Learn- the 28th HawaiiConferenceon Systems Sci- ing,"Joumal of Research in Science Teach- ences, Vol. 4, Maui, HI, 1995, pp. 92-101. ing (29:8), 1992, pp. 791-820. Lay, P. "InteractiveVideo Courseware: Prob- Papert, S. "New Theories for New Learnings," lems, Issues, and Practical Implications," School Psychology Review (13:4), 1984, pp. Journal of EducationalTechnologySystems 422-428. (18:4), 1989-1990, pp. 313-323. Press, L. "Technetronic Education:Answers on Leidner,D.E. "AnExamination Learning of Out- the Cultural Horizon," Communications the of comes in an AdvancedPresentation Electronic ACM(36:5), May1993, pp. 17-22. Classroom," workingpaper, Information Sys- Rathnam, S., Kalakota, R., Whinston, A.B., tems Department, Baylor University,Waco, Hashim, S., and Butterfield,J. "Developing TX, 1994. Information TechnologyforAugmenting Case Leidner, D.E. and Fuller, M.A. "Improving Stu- Discussions: CurrentStatus and Future Di- dent Processing and Assimilation Concep- of rections,"Proceedings of the ThirteenthIn- tual Information: GDSS Supported ternational Conference on Information Collaborative Learning vs. IndividualCon- Systems, J. DeGross, J. Becker,and J. Elam structive Learning,"workingpaper, Informa- (eds.), December 1992, pp. 43-58 (available tion Systems Department,BaylorUniversity, from Association for ComputingMachinery, Waco, TX, 1995. New York). Leidner,D.E. and Jarvenpaa,S.L. "TheInforma- Rubin,A. "VideoLaboratories: Tools for Scien- tion Age ConfrontsEducation:Case Studies tific Investigation,"Communicationsof the on ElectronicClassrooms,"Information Sys- ACM(36:5), May 1993, pp. 64-65. tems Research (4:1), March1993, pp. 24-54. Scardamalia,M. and Bereiter,C. "Technologies Lowe, M.E. "911 for StudentTeachers,"inTech- for Knowledge-Building Discourse,"Commu- nology and Teacher EducationAnnual1993, nications of the ACM (36:5), May 1993, pp. D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A.Willis, and J. Willis 37-41. (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. 672- Schein, E.H. "TheRole of the CEO in the Man- 674. agement of Change:The Case of Information Martocchio, J.J. and Webster, J. "Effects of Technology,"in Transforming Organizations, Feedback and CognitivePlayfulnesson Per- T.A. Kochan and M. Useem (eds.), Oxford formance in Microcomputer Software Train- University Press, New York,1992, pp. 80-95. ing," Personnel Psychology (45:3), 1992, pp. Schlechter,T.M."TheRelativeInstructional Effi- 553-578. ciency of Small Group Computer-Based McKeachie,W.J. "Researchon College Teach- Training," Joural of EducationalComputing Journal of ing: The HistoricalBackground," Research (6:3), 1990, pp. 329-341. 290 MIS 1995 Quarterly/September
Models Learning of Shuell, T.J. "CognitiveConceptions of Learn- U.S. Congress,Officeof Technology Assessment. ing," Review of EducationalResearch, Win- Power On: Tools for Teachingand Leaming, ter, 1986, pp. 411-436. OTA-Set-379, U.S. GovernmentPrintingOf- Singer, J., Behrend,S., and Roschelle, J. "Chil- fice, Washington,D.C., September 1988. dren's CollaborativeUse of a ComputerMi- Walberg, H.J. and Haertel, G.D. "Educational croworld," Proceedings of the Conferenceon Psychology's FirstCentury," Journalof Edu- Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, cationalPsychology (84:1), 1992, pp. 6-19. Portland,OR, September 26-28, 1988 (avail- Watson, C.J. and Driver,R.W."TheInfluenceof able throughAssociation for ComputingMa- Computer Graphicson the Recall of Informa- chinery,New York). tion,"MIS Quarterly (7:1), March 1983, pp. Slatin,J.M."InterChange: Patternsof Interaction 45-53. in Classes Using a Real-TimeConferencing Whipple,W.R. "Collaborative Learning:Recog- System as a Mediumfor Instruction," working nizing It When We See It,"Bulletin of the of paper, Department English,The University American Association for Higher Education of Texas at Austin,Austin,TX, 1990. (40:2), October1987, pp. 3-7. Slavin, R.E. CooperativeLearing: Theory,Re- Yarusso, L. "Constructivism Objectivism," vs. search, and Practice, Prentice Hall, Engle- Performance and InstructionJoumal, April wood Cliffs,NJ, 1990. 1992, pp. 7-9. Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. "Reducing Social Zack, M.H. "Interactivity and Communication Context Cues: ElectronicMail in Organiza- Mode Choice in Ongoing Management tional Communication," ManagementScience Groups," Information Systems Research (32:11), November1986, pp. 1492-1512. (4:3), September 1993, pp. 207-239. Stephenson, S.D,"The Role of the Instructor in Zuboff,S. In the Age of the SmartMachine:The Computer-BasedTraining," Performanceand Futureof Work and Power, Basic Books, Inc. Instruction Joural, August 1992, pp. 23-26. New York,1988. Tenebaum, G. "TheEffectof Qualityof Instruc- tion on Higherand LowerMentalProcesses and On the Predication of Summative Aboutthe Authors Achievement," Joural of Educational Re- search (80:2), December 1982, pp. 105-114. DorothyE. Leidner,assistantprofessorat Baylor in University Waco, Texas, received her Ph.D. in Tennyson, R.D. "AnEducationalLearningThe- information systems in 1992 fromthe University ory for InstructionalDesign," Educational of Texas at Austinwhere she also received her Technology,January1992, pp. 36-41. Master'sand Bachelor'sdegrees. Her research Thompson, A. and Hayes, C. "Patternsof Use interests includeexecutive information of an ElectronicCommunication Networkfor systems, international issues, and electronicclassroom IS Student Teachers and FirstYear Teachers," technologies. She has published in Information Technology and Teacher EducationAnnual Systems Research, the Journalof Management 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Willis,and J. Information Willis (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. Systems, Organization Science, and several conference proceedings. 680-683. Tobias, S. 'When Do Instructional MethodsMake Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa is an associate professor a Difference?" EducationalResearcher, April in the GraduateSchool of Business at the Uni- 1982, pp. 4-9. versity of Texas, Austin. Her research interests Torney-Purta, J. "Computer Networking and lie in the use of IT in global business, learning Collaborative Knowledge Construction:the organization,and using IT to enable organiza- ICONS Computer-AssistedInternational Ne- tionaltransformation. She serves as an associ- gotiation Project,"Technology and Teacher ate editor for Management Science, MIS EducationAnnual 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, Quarterly,Information Systems Research, Da- D.A. Willis, and J. Willis (eds.), Charlottes- taBase, and the Journalof Computer-Mediated ville,VA, 1993, pp. 740-744. Communication. MISQuarterly/September 291 1995

More Related Content

PDF
ICT Educational leadership
Casual Teacher
 
DOC
Integrating ict as an integral teaching and learning tool into pre
syed ahmed
 
PDF
MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS OF STUDENT’S FEEDBACKUSING MOODLE LOGS IN VIRTUAL CLOUD E...
AIRCC Publishing Corporation
 
PDF
Jep 0
Alexander Decker
 
PDF
Learning services-based technological ecosystems
Grial - University of Salamanca
 
DOCX
Unit 1
Sabeeta Lohana
 
DOCX
Online assignment prasad
prasadtrivandrum
 
PDF
Stump -a-model-for-the-adoption-implementation-and-use-of-m-learning-or-e-lea...
Dr. Nana Kofi Annan
 
ICT Educational leadership
Casual Teacher
 
Integrating ict as an integral teaching and learning tool into pre
syed ahmed
 
MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS OF STUDENT’S FEEDBACKUSING MOODLE LOGS IN VIRTUAL CLOUD E...
AIRCC Publishing Corporation
 
Jep 0
Alexander Decker
 
Learning services-based technological ecosystems
Grial - University of Salamanca
 
Unit 1
Sabeeta Lohana
 
Online assignment prasad
prasadtrivandrum
 
Stump -a-model-for-the-adoption-implementation-and-use-of-m-learning-or-e-lea...
Dr. Nana Kofi Annan
 

What's hot (17)

PDF
Demographic implications for the user perceptions of e-learning in higher edu...
Tariq Ghayyur
 
PDF
Analyzing satisfacting
Aziz Ahmad
 
PPTX
Teaching with technology
Aripuur
 
PDF
3 ej1117260
Soravich Jindia
 
PDF
Managing Knowledge within Communities of Practice: Analysing Needs and Develo...
eLearning Papers
 
PDF
Introducing ict into teacher training programs-problems in bangladesh
Alexander Decker
 
PPSX
Educ9701 week 1 readings
Trudy Sweeney
 
PDF
Knowledge, social media and technologies for a learning society
wanzahirah
 
PDF
Il modello TPCK
Luisa Marini
 
PDF
It's Time for Learning to Go Back to School: Next-Generation Approaches Enric...
Cognizant
 
PPTX
Introduction of TPACK-XL: Building Future Teachers' Knowledge Base to Teach i...
Dr. Milad M. SAAD
 
PDF
ULTO Teaching & Learning Conference
Anthony Rippon
 
PDF
Professional Development approach to motivate teachers to overcome the second...
Willy Castro
 
PDF
TPACK-XL Framework for Educators and Scholars: A Theoretical Grounding for Bu...
Dr. Milad M. SAAD
 
PDF
Basic technology teachers’ awareness and attitude towards the use of informat...
Alexander Decker
 
PDF
Ijciet 06 09_005
IAEME Publication
 
PDF
Successful implementation of tpack in teacher
IJITE
 
Demographic implications for the user perceptions of e-learning in higher edu...
Tariq Ghayyur
 
Analyzing satisfacting
Aziz Ahmad
 
Teaching with technology
Aripuur
 
3 ej1117260
Soravich Jindia
 
Managing Knowledge within Communities of Practice: Analysing Needs and Develo...
eLearning Papers
 
Introducing ict into teacher training programs-problems in bangladesh
Alexander Decker
 
Educ9701 week 1 readings
Trudy Sweeney
 
Knowledge, social media and technologies for a learning society
wanzahirah
 
Il modello TPCK
Luisa Marini
 
It's Time for Learning to Go Back to School: Next-Generation Approaches Enric...
Cognizant
 
Introduction of TPACK-XL: Building Future Teachers' Knowledge Base to Teach i...
Dr. Milad M. SAAD
 
ULTO Teaching & Learning Conference
Anthony Rippon
 
Professional Development approach to motivate teachers to overcome the second...
Willy Castro
 
TPACK-XL Framework for Educators and Scholars: A Theoretical Grounding for Bu...
Dr. Milad M. SAAD
 
Basic technology teachers’ awareness and attitude towards the use of informat...
Alexander Decker
 
Ijciet 06 09_005
IAEME Publication
 
Successful implementation of tpack in teacher
IJITE
 
Ad

Viewers also liked (6)

PPT
Powerpoint
chakraiya
 
DOCX
Konflik antara kebudayaan tradisional dan kebudayaan moden
Nuo Ting Diong
 
DOCX
เฉลยข้อสอบเรื่องแผนที่ม.1
Onlyu Pandpat
 
PPTX
Sunan giri
IFKARIM
 
PDF
Roger Martin and Integrative Thinking
N_Albro
 
PPTX
sistem saraf pusat
IFKARIM
 
Powerpoint
chakraiya
 
Konflik antara kebudayaan tradisional dan kebudayaan moden
Nuo Ting Diong
 
เฉลยข้อสอบเรื่องแผนที่ม.1
Onlyu Pandpat
 
Sunan giri
IFKARIM
 
Roger Martin and Integrative Thinking
N_Albro
 
sistem saraf pusat
IFKARIM
 
Ad

Similar to It use in mba (20)

PPTX
Ed Tech: transforming education
Marc-Andre Leger
 
PDF
ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION
Claire Webber
 
DOCX
A Survey on E-Learning System with Data Mining
IIRindia
 
PPTX
Meda5400 emergingtechnology
Michelle Childress
 
PDF
Module 5_VispoJannaDanna.pdf
JANNADANNAVISPO
 
PDF
ENSAYO, El impacto de la tecnología en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje es...
katherinemileidyscar
 
DOCX
Integration of technology
lisawitteman
 
PDF
Multilevel Analysis of Student's Feedback Using Moodle Logs in Virtual Cloud ...
AIRCC Publishing Corporation
 
PDF
Learning analytics definitions processes potential
Fernando Bordignon
 
PDF
La Tecnología Educativa como campo de Estudio Pedagógico
YarianisVega
 
PDF
Using ICTs for quality in teaching
e-sh
 
PDF
Successful implementation of e-Learning Pedagogical considerations.Thavamalar...
eraser Juan José Calderón
 
PDF
Ensayo-English, tecnología educativa como campo de estudio pedagogico.
idalysb19
 
DOCX
Technology Enabled Learning to Improve Student Performance: A Survey
IIRindia
 
DOCX
Technology Enabled Learning to Improve Student Performance: A Survey
IIRindia
 
PDF
The Role of Big Data Management and Analytics in Higher Education
Business, Management and Economics Research
 
DOCX
Document
vazhichal12
 
DOCX
Baselios marthoma mathews ii
Arun Kumar
 
PDF
USABILITY OF WEB SITES ADDRESSING TECHNOLOGY BASED CASER (CLASSROOM ASSESSMEN...
IJCI JOURNAL
 
PDF
Developing a Computer-Assisted Instruction Model for Vocational High Schools
inventy
 
Ed Tech: transforming education
Marc-Andre Leger
 
ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION
Claire Webber
 
A Survey on E-Learning System with Data Mining
IIRindia
 
Meda5400 emergingtechnology
Michelle Childress
 
Module 5_VispoJannaDanna.pdf
JANNADANNAVISPO
 
ENSAYO, El impacto de la tecnología en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje es...
katherinemileidyscar
 
Integration of technology
lisawitteman
 
Multilevel Analysis of Student's Feedback Using Moodle Logs in Virtual Cloud ...
AIRCC Publishing Corporation
 
Learning analytics definitions processes potential
Fernando Bordignon
 
La Tecnología Educativa como campo de Estudio Pedagógico
YarianisVega
 
Using ICTs for quality in teaching
e-sh
 
Successful implementation of e-Learning Pedagogical considerations.Thavamalar...
eraser Juan José Calderón
 
Ensayo-English, tecnología educativa como campo de estudio pedagogico.
idalysb19
 
Technology Enabled Learning to Improve Student Performance: A Survey
IIRindia
 
Technology Enabled Learning to Improve Student Performance: A Survey
IIRindia
 
The Role of Big Data Management and Analytics in Higher Education
Business, Management and Economics Research
 
Document
vazhichal12
 
Baselios marthoma mathews ii
Arun Kumar
 
USABILITY OF WEB SITES ADDRESSING TECHNOLOGY BASED CASER (CLASSROOM ASSESSMEN...
IJCI JOURNAL
 
Developing a Computer-Assisted Instruction Model for Vocational High Schools
inventy
 

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
Solara Labs: Empowering Health through Innovative Nutraceutical Solutions
The lifescience magaizne
 
PDF
Daniels 2024 Inclusive, Sustainable Development
CMassociates
 
PPTX
Principles of Marketing, Industrial, Consumers,
efranciscaantoinette
 
PDF
Nante Industrial Plug Factory: Engineering Quality for Modern Power Applications
gdhdgee963
 
PDF
1911 Gold Corporate Presentation Aug 2025.pdf
Shaun Heinrichs
 
PDF
How to Get Approval for Business Funding
Jake Thornhill
 
PPTX
operations management : demand supply ch
JayeshJaiswal23
 
PPTX
Board-Reporting-Package-by-Umbrex-5-23-23.pptx
Pars Six Sigma Excellence
 
PPTX
Slide gioi thieu VietinBank Quy 2 - 2025
hoadm5190
 
PDF
kom-180-proposal-for-a-directive-amending-directive-2014-45-eu-and-directive-...
nlusch08
 
PDF
Ôn tập tiếng anh trong kinh doanh nâng cao
thaoonguyenn2311
 
PPTX
sales presentation، Training Overview.pptx
hamdullahazimi3
 
PDF
THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO BUILDING PASSIVE INCOME ONLINE
Malcolm86
 
PDF
Outsourced Audit & Assurance in USA Why Globus Finanza is Your Trusted Choice
Globus finanza
 
PDF
TyAnn Osborn: A Visionary Leader Shaping Corporate Workforce Dynamics
CIO WOMEN MAGAIZNE CIO WOMEN MAGAIZNE
 
PDF
How to Get Funding for Your Trucking Business
Jake Thornhill
 
PPTX
TRAINNING, DEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISAL.pptx
sy2773667
 
PDF
SIMNET Inc – 2023’s Most Trusted IT Services & Solution Provider
sidnik500
 
PPTX
svnfcksanfskjcsnvvjknsnvsdscnsncxasxa saccacxsax
ergvedfvef sdvsfvdvd
 
PPTX
3. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE UNIIT 3^..pptx
ZAMANYousufzai1
 
Solara Labs: Empowering Health through Innovative Nutraceutical Solutions
The lifescience magaizne
 
Daniels 2024 Inclusive, Sustainable Development
CMassociates
 
Principles of Marketing, Industrial, Consumers,
efranciscaantoinette
 
Nante Industrial Plug Factory: Engineering Quality for Modern Power Applications
gdhdgee963
 
1911 Gold Corporate Presentation Aug 2025.pdf
Shaun Heinrichs
 
How to Get Approval for Business Funding
Jake Thornhill
 
operations management : demand supply ch
JayeshJaiswal23
 
Board-Reporting-Package-by-Umbrex-5-23-23.pptx
Pars Six Sigma Excellence
 
Slide gioi thieu VietinBank Quy 2 - 2025
hoadm5190
 
kom-180-proposal-for-a-directive-amending-directive-2014-45-eu-and-directive-...
nlusch08
 
Ôn tập tiếng anh trong kinh doanh nâng cao
thaoonguyenn2311
 
sales presentation، Training Overview.pptx
hamdullahazimi3
 
THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO BUILDING PASSIVE INCOME ONLINE
Malcolm86
 
Outsourced Audit & Assurance in USA Why Globus Finanza is Your Trusted Choice
Globus finanza
 
TyAnn Osborn: A Visionary Leader Shaping Corporate Workforce Dynamics
CIO WOMEN MAGAIZNE CIO WOMEN MAGAIZNE
 
How to Get Funding for Your Trucking Business
Jake Thornhill
 
TRAINNING, DEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISAL.pptx
sy2773667
 
SIMNET Inc – 2023’s Most Trusted IT Services & Solution Provider
sidnik500
 
svnfcksanfskjcsnvvjknsnvsdscnsncxasxa saccacxsax
ergvedfvef sdvsfvdvd
 
3. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE UNIIT 3^..pptx
ZAMANYousufzai1
 

It use in mba

  • 1. The Use of Information Technology to Enhance Management School Education: A Theoretical View Author(s): Dorothy E. Leidner and Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa Source: MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 3, Special Issue on IS Curricula and Pedagogy, (Sep., 1995), pp. 265-291 Published by: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/249596 Accessed: 15/04/2008 11:44 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=misrc. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We enable the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. http://www.jstor.org
  • 2. Modelsof Learning The Use of nologies in which management schools should invest in order to informate up and down and ul- Information timately transform the educational environment and processes. For researchers interested in Technology to the use of information technology to improve learning processes, the paper provides a theo- Enhance retical foundation for future work. Management School Keywords Educational technology, classroom technology, electronic classrooms, learning, Education: A instruction Theoretical View ISRL Categories: AA06, HB08 Introduction By: Dorothy E. Leidner Baylor University Although universities create and acquire knowl- P.O. Box 98005 edge, they are seldom successful in applying Waco, Texas 76798 that knowledge to their own activities (Garvin, U.S.A. 1993). In fact, academic institutions typically lag businesses by roughly a decade in the adoption dorothy_leidner@business.baylor.edu of new technologies (U.S. Congress, 1988). This is certainly true in terms of the application of in- Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa formation technology (IT) into the learning proc- The University of Texas at Austin ess: the blackboard and chalk remain the Graduate School of Business, primaryteaching technologies in many business CBA5.202 schools even while the merits of information Austin, Texas 78712 technology to improve communication, effi- U.S.A. ciency, and decision making in organizations sjarven paa@mail.utexas.edu are recognized and inculcated by IS re- searchers. However, as business schools expe- rience increased competitive pressures, Abstract information technology is one area that schools To use information technology to improve leam- might use to differentiate or compete with or, more importantly, to use as a catalyst for trans- ing processes, the pedagogical assumptions un- forming educational processes. IT is not her- derlying the design of information technology for alded as a miraculous yet unpredictable means educational purposes must be understood. This of mitigating educational attrition, but as an effi- paper reviews different models of leaming, sur- cacious means of enabling intentional changes faces assumptions of electronic teaching tech- in teaching and learning processes. nology, and relates those assumptions to the differing models of learning. Our analysis sug- Some business schools have already begun gests that initial attempts to bring information building classroom facilities that incorporate in- technology to management education follow a formation technologies in hopes of improving classic story of automating rather than trans- the learning and teaching processes. For exam- forming. IT is primarily used to automate the in- ple, the University of Maryland houses an elec- formation delivery function in classrooms. In the tronic classroom that enables groups of absence of fundamental changes to the teach- students to work together while communicating ing and learning process, such classrooms may electronically and anonymously (Alavi, 1994). At do little but speed up ineffective processes and Harvard Business School, a pilot program was methods of teaching. Our mapping of technolo- conducted where each student's dormitory room gies to learning models identifies sets of tech- was equipped with a personal computer networked MISQuarterly/September 1995 265
  • 3. Modelsof Learning to share laser printersand scanners in common of pedagogical assumptions helps to identify the livingspaces. Interactivecomputerapplications types of technologies that automate the tradi- and simulationexercises were used to supple- tionallearningmodel and those that begin to en- ment the traditionalcase study preparation. Stu- able transformation a new model. Borrowing into dents had access to digitizedvideos on factories, from the technology and organizationalchange production processes, marketing campaigns, literature,three transformationalvisions are de- and interviewswith protagonistsfrom the case scribed: informate up, informate down, and study firms, allowing the students "to 'visit'the transform a virtuallearningspace. The paper to factory they were studying and 'meet' the key concludes witha discussion of technologies that players in the case" before going to class. The management schools might consider investing students also had access to Headline News, a in if they desire radicalchanges in their educa- consolidationof majornews fromleading maga- tionalprocesses. zines and newspapers across the world,and a plethora of economic and financialdatabases from commercial providersto augment the in- dustry analysis (The Harbus News, 1994). Theories of Learning: Althoughpromising,these developmentsremain isolated experimentseven withintheirown insti- Assumptions tutions. While such developments representat- The use of ITin an educationalsettingwillreflect tempts to provide technology tools to improve either purposelyor inadvertently some model of the teaching and/orlearningprocesses, they are learning.The followingreview of learningmod- often undertaken without a thorough assess- els is not exhaustive; ratherit seeks to highlight ment of the learninggains desired or even pos- major differences among the more widely ac- sible. For instance, high expectations without cepted models of learning in terms of their as- clear objectives and realisticgoals may lead to sumptions,goals, and instructional implications. the development of state-of-the-art facilities,at once impressive yet intimidating, Learningmodels are often classified as being replete with behavioral or cognitive. Objectivism, also re- potentialyet lacking clear guidelines on how to ferred to as the traditionalmodel of learning,is use the technology to achieve learningimprove- the behavioralmodel of learningand represents ments. Earlyresearch in the area of learningim- a traditional view of learning.The primary com- provements that may be facilitated with peting cognitive model is constructivism.The information technology is thus needed. The ob- constructivist model has a numberof derivations jective of this paper is to delineate technologies includingcollaborativism and cognitive informa- currently available to support traditionaland tion processing. The socioculturalism model non-traditional methods of learning in order to shares some assumptions and goals with con- help guide universitiesin their learningtechnol- but structivism, challenges some others.1 ogy investmentdecisions, to help professors ef- fectively apply the new classroom technologies, and to manage the expectations of university administratorsand professors concerning the The objectivistmodel of learning benefits of the technologies. The objectivistmodel of learning is based on Skinner's stimulus-response theory: learningis The premise of this paper is that the effective- a change in the behavioraldispositionof an or- ness of information technology in contributing to ganism (Jonassen, 1993) thatcan be shaped by learningwill be a functionof how well the tech- selective reinforcement. The tenet of the model nology supports a particularmodel of learning is that there is an objective realityand that the and the appropriatenessof the model to a par- goal of learningis to understandthis realityand ticularlearningsituation.The paper begins with a discussion of the most commonlyadvocated 1 Social learningtheory is yet another model of learningand models of learning. How the assumptions of IT lies somewhere in the middleof an objectivist-constructivist are intertwined with the assumptions of the continuum.The interested reader is referred to Grusec learningmodels is then analyzed. The mapping (1992). 266 MIS Quarterly/September 1995
  • 4. Modelsof Learning modify behavior accordingly (Jonassen, 1993). factual or procedural-based learning. However, The goal of teaching is to facilitate the transfer models challenging objectivism have emerged. of knowledge from the expert to the learner. Er- The most widely accepted alternate model is rors in understanding are the result of imperfect constructivism and its derivations-collaborativ- or incomplete knowledge transfer. The model ism and cognitive information processing. makes several pedagogical assumptions re- garding learning and instruction. In terms of learning, the first assumption is that there exists The constructivist model of learning a reality that is agreed upon by individuals. Sec- Constructivism denies the existence of an exter- ond, this reality can be represented and trans- nal reality independent of each individual's mind. ferred to a learner. Third, the purpose of the Rather than transmitted, knowledge is created, mind is to act as a mirrorof reality rather than as or constructed, by each learner. The mind is not an interpreterof reality (Jonassen, 1993). Fourth, a tool for reproducing the external reality, but all learners use essentially the same processes rather the mind produces its own, unique con- for representing and understanding the world. ception of events (Jonassen, 1993). Each reality In terms of instruction, the objectivist model as- is somewhat different, based on learners' expe- sumes that the goal of teaching is to efficiently riences and biases. More moderate construc- transmit knowledge from the expert to the tivists do not preclude the possibility of the learner. Instructors structure reality into abstract existence of an objective world, but assume that or generalized representations that can be each individual constructs his or her own reality transferred and then recalled by students of the objective world (Yarusso, 1992). Eventu- (Yarusso, 1992). For example, words in a lan- ally, having analyzed different interpretations of guage are symbolic representations of the exter- information, the learner is able to detach himself nal world enabling individuals to communicate from a subjective world of personal experience using symbols rather than pointing to actual ob- to the formation of abstract concepts to repre- jects. Individuals must share the same under- sent reality (O'Loughlin, 1992). Learning, then, standing of the words in order to communicate is the formation of abstract concepts to repre- efficiently. The objectivist model also assumes sent reality; learning is that which "decentrizes" that the instructor is the source of objective the individual from the material. Learning is re- knowledge that is related, rather then created, flected in "intellectual growth that leads to scien- during class. The instructor should be in control tific reasoning, abstract thought, and formal of the material and pace of learning. Via ques- operations" (O'Loughlin, 1992). tions, the instructor assesses whether transfer The constructivist model calls for learner-cen- occurred. Another assumption is that students tered instruction: individuals are assumed to learn best in isolated and intensive confronta- learn better when they are forced to discover tions with a subject matter. things themselves rather than when they are told, The lecture method of teaching embeds the or instructed. Students must control the pace of pedagogical assumptions of the objectivist instruction. Based upon the work of Piaget, the model of learning. The lecture method is the learner must have experience with hypothesiz- most frequently used instructional method in ing and predicting, manipulating objects, posing higher education (McKeachie, 1990). To an ob- questions, researching answers, imagining, in- jectivist, the presentation of information is criti- vestigating, and inventing, in order for knowl- cal. Any mechanism that enhances the edge construction to occur (O'Loughlin, 1992).2 communication of the knowledge should en- hance the transfer, or student learning. The 2 It should be noted that Piaget's theory, which forms the foundation of constructivism, was based on his studies of the model also implies that the pace of instruction psychological development of children. Although children should be designed modularly with students' need physical actions to grasp new information, adults need progressing on one topic area before proceed- vivid examples and illustrations (O'Loughlin, 1992). Thus, ing to the next one. while the concepts underlying constructivism may seem appealing to those who disagree with the underlying The objectivist model may be the most appropri- assumptions of traditionalism, they may be less applicable to ate model in some contexts-for example, in adult learning situations. MISQuarterly/September 1995 267
  • 5. Modelsof Learning The teacher serves as the creative mediatorof Consequently, in additionto sharing the peda- the process. Classtime mightbecome a project- gogical assumptions of constructivism, collabo- oriented session where the instructorprovides ratists also assume that knowledge is created tools for helping learners construct their own as it is shared, and the more it is shared, the views of reality.Learning focuses on discovering more is learned. Anotherpedagogical assump- conceptual relationships,exploringmultiple rep- tion is that learners have priorknowledge they resentations or perspectives on an issue, and/or can contributeto the discussion. A third as- immersingthe learner in the real-world context sumptionis that participation criticalto learn- is in which the learning is relevant (Jonassen, ing. A fourth assumption is that learners will 1993). Lastly,constructivism advocates non-cri- participateif given optimal conditions such as terion forms of performanceassessments such small groupsto workwith. as student learningjournals(Hawkins,1993). One implication the cooperativemodel for in- of However, in practice,constructivismis often re- structional methods is that the instructor's is role duced to students'searchingforthe preordained to facilitatemaximalinformation knowledge and knowledge that could be more efficiently trans- sharing among learners ratherthan controlling mitted via the instructor. This tends to happen the contentand deliveryof learning.Anotherim- particularly with fact-based or procedurallearn- plicationis that the instructor's role is to provide ing. Criticsof constructivismargue that there is feedback duringclass although feedback from little benefit in having learners construct such the learner'speers is similarly critical.Forexam- preordainedknowledge;it is only when learners ple, students are foundto plan more extensively are allowed to construct new meaning, such as and writemore carefullywhen they are commu- in higher-orderlearning,that the goals of con- nicating with an audience of peers than when structivismare truly achieved. However, it can they are being evaluated solely by the instructor also be argued that greater understandingof (Bagley and Hunter, 1992). However, groups factual and procedural material results when withoutinstructor feedback are unable to attain learners are forced to discover the knowledge the same level of understandingor mastery as themselves than when they are merelytold. groups with both peer and instructorfeedback (Stephenson, 1992). A third implicationfor in- struction the need for cooperativeassessment is The cooperative model of learning strategies. The traditionalcompetitive assess- ment strategies may disable learning:a learner An offspring of the constructivistmodel is the may be motivated to withholdknowledge that cooperative, or collaborative, learning model. wouldotherwisebe shared withpeers. Whereas in constructivismlearningis assumed to occur as an individual interactswith objects, Studies have demonstrated that cooperative in collaborativism,learningemerges throughin- learning is superiorto individualistic instruction teraction of individualswith other individuals in a wide arrayof content areas in terms of in- (Slavin, 1990). Learningoccurs as individuals creases in individual achievement, positive exercise, verify,solidify,and improvetheirmen- changes in social attitudes, and general en- tal models through discussion and information hancement of motivation learn (Flynn,1992). to sharing. The contributionof different under- Learnerstend to generate higher-levelreason- standings leads to a new, shared knowledge ing strategies, a greater diversityof ideas and (Whipple,1987). Whereas instructor-ledcom- procedures, more critical thinking, and more munication is inherently linear, collaborative creative responses when they are activelylearn- groups allow more branching and concentric- ing in cooperative groups than when they are ity (Flynn, 1992). Although the major goal of or learningindividually competitively (Schlechter, cooperative learning is the construction of 1990). Even when the instructional environment shared understanding through interaction of group projectswas not geared towardcoop- with other individuals, an implicit goal is im- erative learning, cooperative learning occurred proving communication and listening skills and contributed to longer-term retention and eliciting participation. (Schlechter,1990). 1995 268 MISQuarterly/September
  • 6. Modelsof Learning The cognitive information concepts to represent reality. Rather, knowledge cannot be divorced from the historical and cul- processing model of learning tural background of the learner (O'Loughlin, The cognitive information processing model is 1992). The more meaningful, the more deeply or another extension of the constructivist model elaboratively processed, the more situated in and focuses on cognitive processes used in context, and the more rooted in cultural back- learning. Learning involves processing instruc- ground, metacognition, and personal knowledge tional input to develop, test, and refine mental an event is, the more readily it is learned (Iran- models in long-term memory until they are effec- Nejad, et al., 1990). While socioculturalists em- tive and reliable enough in problem-solving situ- brace the concept that there is no one external ations (Schuell, 1986). The frequency and reality, they argue that constructivism and col- intensity with which a student cognitively pro- laborativism force the minority culture into cesses instructional input controls the pace of adopting the understanding derived by the ma- learning. Instructional inputs that are unnoticed, jority. Even a collaborative work group does or unprocessed, by learners cannot have any not foster participation for minorities: "shared impact on mental models (Bovy, 1981; Brun- understanding" is biased by cultural and social ning, 1983). factors. A major assumption of the model is that learners The major assumption of socioculturalism is that differ in terms of their preferred learning style. middle-class Anglo male America has prevented Instructional methods that match an individual's a genuinely emancipatory environment "inwhich learning style will be the most effective (Bovy, students begin to construct meaning on their 1981). This suggests the need for individualized own terms and in their own interests" (O'Lough- instruction. The cognitive processing model also lin, 1992). The objectivist model of learning is assumes that the individual's prior knowledge is seen as one that negates the subjective voices represented by a mental model in memory and that students develop from their own culture and that the mental model, or schemata, is an impor- becomes an instrument of power perpetuating tant determinant of how effectively the learner the social class inherent in society by forcing all will process new information. The implication is students to speak in the dialogue acceptable to that the instructional support required is in- the instructor and peers (O'Loughlin, 1992). The versely related to the depth of existing knowl- major implication of socioculturalism is that stu- edge as well as to the effectiveness of the dents should participate on their own terms. In- learner's information processing style (Bovy, struction should not deliver a single interpretation 1981). A third assumption is that given a of reality nor a culturally biased interpretation of learner's limited information processing capac- reality. In comparison to the constructivist and ity, attention is selective (Bovy, 1981). Selective cognitive models, the sociocultural model is in a attention is an interrelated function of the dis- nascent stage, and practical applications of the play, the cognitive structure of the learner, and model to instruction are still being formulated. the prior experience of the learner. Preinstruc- tional methods such as topic outlines and learn- ing goals might improve learning because they direct attention (Brunning, 1983). Summary The learning theories are summarized in Table 1. Figure 1 graphically illustrates the similarities and The socioculturalmodel of learning differences among learning models.3 Whereas collaborativism and the cognitive infor- The objective model assumes that an instructor mation processing model are extensions of con- should be in control of the learning environment structivism, the sociocultural model is both an 3 The figuremaps current learningtheoriesonly.Because it is extension of and a reaction against some as- a multidimensional figure presented in two dimensions, sumptions of constructivism. In particular, so- certain hypotheticalmodels (such as a model where the cioculturalists disagree with Piaget's view that instructor in control,butknowledgeis createdby students) is the goal of learning is the formation of abstract cannotbe represented thisfigure. on MIS Quarterly/September 1995 269
  • 7. Modelsof Learning Table 1. Summary of Learning Models Implications for Model Basic Premise Goals Assumptions Major Instruction Objectivism Learning the is Transferof Instructorhouses Instructor in is uncritical absorption knowledge all necessary controlof material of objective frominstructor knowledge. and pace. knowledge. to student. Studentslearnbest Instructorprovides Recallof in isolatedand stimulus. knowledge. intensivesubject matter. Constructivism Learning a is Formation of Individualslearn Learner-centered process of abstractconcepts betterwhen they active learning. constructing to representreality. discoverthings knowledgeby an themselves and for Instructor individual. Assigningmeaning when they control supportratherthan to events and the pace of learning. direction. information. Collaborativism Learning emerges Promotegroup Involvement is Communication- throughshared skills-commun- critical learning. to oriented. understandingsof ication,listening, morethanone participation. Learnershave as Instructor learner. some prior questionerand Promote knowledge. discussion leader. socialization. Cognitive Learning the is Improve cognitive Limited selective Aspects of stimulus Information processingand processingabilities attention. can affect attention. Processing transferof new of learners. knowledgeinto Priorknowledge need Instructors long-term memory. Improve recalland affects level of feedback on retention. instructional studentlearning. supportneeded. Socioculturism Learning is Empowerment. Angloshave is Instruction subjectiveand distorted always culturally individualistic. Emancipatory knowledgeand value laden. learning. framedinformation in theirown terms. Instructionis Action-oriented, embedded in a sociallyconscious Learningoccurs person's everyday learnerswitha view best in cultural/social to change rather environments context. thanaccept or where personally understand society. well known. (i.e., pace and material), that learning is dis- parate points of view, that knowledge is person- semination of knowledge, that dissemination ally experienced but can be shared through col- best occurs via abstract representations of the laborating, and that the realism of context is reality, and that learning occurs best in isolated high in the sense that individual experiences settings (i.e., the context of the learning environ- prior to learning are real but low in the sense ment need not be "real"). Collaborativismassumes that the experiences are shared vicariously that the control of the learning environment through discourse. Constructivism assumes that should rest with the peer groups, that learning is the learner needs to be in control of the learning the sharing of knowledge representative of dis- environment, that learning is the creation of 1995 270 MISQuarterly/September
  • 8. Modelsof Learning Realism of Context Low High Creationof Knowledge Socioculturalism Learner by Student Cognitive Information Processing Constructivism Control Learning Sharingof of the is Knowledge Peer Learning Group Environment Collaborativism Dissemination of Knowledge by Instructor Instructor Objectivism A bstractions Personally I Knowledge is Experienced Figure 1. The Dimensions of the Learning Theories knowledge, and that the realism of the context the many dimensions of a given course. Infor- for learning needs to be high. Cognitive informa- mation technology can then be a facilitator of tion processing differs from constructivism in the effective application of the learning models. emphasizing that learning is the formation of ab- The next section establishes links between the stract concepts to represent reality and that the assumptions of the learning models and the as- context need not necessarily be high in order for sumptions of the information technologies in such abstraction to occur. Socioculturism as- use in educational settings. sumes that the learner must be in control of learning, that learning is interpretation of knowl- edge by the learner, that specificity and immer- sion in experiential activities promote learning, and that learning best occurs in the context in Information Technologies: which it will be used. Surfacing Educational No particular model is the best approach; in- Assumptions deed, different learning approaches will be ap- The technology discussion is organized accord- propriate depending on the circumstances- ing to what is labeled visions of electronic class- course content, student experience, maturity, rooms-each vision representing a different intelligence, and instructor goals, skills, and potential impact of IT on learning. These visions preferences, among others. However, the in- were derived from the organizational research structor must be cognizant of the choice of a on ITvisions (Schein, 1992; Zuboff, 1988): auto- learning model. Moreover, the instructor should mating, informating up, informating down, and be aware of the different learning models and transforming. Some technologies can facilitate the different outcomes anticipated by the mod- more than one vision. Both positive and nega- els. The chosen model must take into account tive potential outcomes of technologies are MISQuarterly/September 1995 271
  • 9. Modelsof Learning discussed. The technologies are also discussed screen duringclass, and providing students the in terms of the underlying assumptions regard- ability to printthe instructor'slecture outlines. ing the way in which they facilitatelearningand The most well-likedmethodwas video clips, but relate this to the learningmodels of the previous these were also judged the least helpful to section. learning.The abilityto printthe instructor's lec- ture notes were the second most well-likedas- pect of the technology. less-likedtopicoutlines The The vision to automate:automated projectedfrom a computerwere deemed most classrooms helpfulto learning. The vision to automate is the perceptionthat IT At BaylorUniversity (Leidner,1994), the instruc- is a means of replacing expensive, unreliable tor consoles in smaller classes contributedto human labor with information technology.In or- both perceived and actual structure. Students ganizations characterizedby the vision to auto- perceived the courses taught in the automated mate, the role of IT is to provide operational classrooms to be more organized than courses savings and improve quality by performing taught in traditional classrooms. The advanced structured, routine, operational tasks reliably preparation a presentationor a softwaredem- of and efficiently.Because teaching and learning onstrationenforced a structureto the class that are at best semi-structured activities,neither is might not otherwise have existed. Students re- conducive to automation.Yet certainaspects of ported high satisfactionin the automatedclass- instruction,particularly delivery of informa- the room, but did not reportgreater learningthan in tion characteristics of the objectivistmodel of a traditional classroom for a varietyof different learning,are proneto automation. courses. The structuremighthave contributed to the students' satisfactionwith the learningpro- Information technologies whose purpose is to cess althoughthe technology might have elimi- providetools for manipulating presentingin- and nated the informaldiscussion that would have structionalmaterialin a classroom are referred to in this paper as classroom automationtech- promotedknowledgecreation. nology. These include: (1) instructorconsoles Similarly,a study conducted by the Air Force equipped withpresentationsoftwareand display Academy found no significantdifferencein per- consoles and stand-alone controls, (2) instructor formance, althoughit found significantimprove- student computers, (3) computer-assisted in- ments in student attitudes about the instructor struction (drilland practice programs),and (4) and the course when students were taught in distance learning. classrooms equipped with instructorworksta- tions and videodisks versus when taught in a traditional classroom (Gist, et al., 1988). A new- ness effect-a fascination with the technology Instructor Console -might also explain the results. This is similar The instructorconsole refers to a computer to results found with transparenciesin the early 1970s (Neter and Chervany,1973). As a conse- equipped with end-user software and used by an instructorin a classroom. The technology quence, although the automated classrooms may hold littleadvantage over traditional class- may be a permanentfixtureof the classroom or rooms in terms of actual student learning,they may be broughtin on a cart. The primary goals are the facilitation presentations-freeing the of may influencestudent attitudestowardthe qual- instructorfrom the tedium of writingon a chalk- and towardthe organization ity of the instructor board and making the presentation more vivid of the course. and memorablefor students. The use of an instructorconsole is based on A study at Northwestern University (Janda, several pedagogical assumptions. One is that 1989) examines the impactof the instructorcon- teaching is about presenting material;technol- sole in large (over 200 students) government ogy can improveboth the process and product classes on student attitudes toward showing The of presentation. improvement occurs through short video clips on events in Americanpolitics, the use of color and graphics. Prior research has found that graphics can create interest and projectingtopic outlines of lecture notes on a 1995 272 MISQuarterly/September
  • 10. Modelsof Learning appeal to the users, can increase the compre- appropriate software and assist the students hension of the information, and can help the in- when they encounter problems (Leidner and formation be more easily remembered Jarvenpaa, 1993). The former use of the tech- (DeSanctis, 1984). Color has been shown to in- nology supports the objectivist model of learn- crease attention but not necessarily comprehen- ing; the latter, constructivism. sion of information (DeSanctis, 1984). Similarly, At the college level, a positive relationship was borrowing from graphics research in the organ- found between student control of learning with izational context, the mode of presentation of motivation and performance (Fisher and Grant, classroom information may affect student com- 1983). Engaging in in-class analysis of various prehension, student recall, and student perform- alternatives to a problem allows students to con- ance as well as student attitude (Benbasat and struct knowledge via computers. One study Dexter, 1985; Watson and Driver, 1983). (Leidner and Jarvenpaa, 1993), however, found The instructor console technology most closely a low percentage of use for such constructivist maps to the objectivist models of learning and learning and a higher percentage of use for soft- instruction. The instructor maintains control over ware demonstrations where students were the content and pace of instruction, the focus is merely emulating the instructor. The sessions in on knowledge dissemination rather than knowl- which students were allowed to analyze data in edge creation, and the instructor remains the teams of two proved to be the most constructive primary source of knowledge. The technology method in the classroom; during these sessions, maps secondarily to the cognitive information exploratory discussions at a high conceptual processing model. The more structured and level were common. A similar finding was re- vivid the transmission, the easier it is for a ported in Carrier and Sales (1987). learner to absorb the information.4The cognitive The use of instructor console and stand-alone information processing model would attribute this result to outlines that are learning strategies computers assumes that altering the delivery of information by presentation technologies or by that help students more readily process and or- allowing students to emulate an instructor will ganize information in their memory. However, outlines could also be manually provided or writ- improve the learning process. These assump- tions align with the objectivist model, whereas ten on a chalkboard. The role of the technology the assumption that learning will be more effec- is to increase the ease of displaying an outline, tive if the student is required to actively perform rather than causing the outline to be effective. procedures during class supports a construc- tivist model of learning. Instructor Console and Stand-Alone Student Computers Computer-Assisted Instruction A slightly more advanced automated classroom (CAI)/Computer-Based Training (CBT) would include stand-alone5 computers on stu- dents' desks to provide them with access to the Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is an inter- active software program that provides informa- same software packages as the instructor. This tion in sequential or non-linear modes to helps students learn by enabling them to emu- increase a student's knowledge and under- late an instructor's steps on a particularsoftware standing of a subject matter (Lay, 1989-90).6 package. Another approach is for the instructor to give students a problem to analyze using the Among the most lauded goals of CAI is to give control of the learning process to the learner. 4 Yet media research consistently fails to find significant 6 CAI has been the term used for interactive computer-based learning differences across varying delivery mechanisms systems used in educational systems, while similar systems (Clark 1991). Clark argues that the reason for this is that used in organizational training have been commonly referred many different media attributes accomplish the same to as Computer-Based Training. More recently, Interactive learning goal and that any teaching method could be Learning System (ILS) has become the term encompassing designed into a variety of media presentations. both interactive computer-assisted instruction and interactive 5 We say stand-alone meaning that the computers are not computer-based training. This varies from the earlier CAI and equipped with communication facilities between the CBT because it gives more control over the sequence of computers nor with access to exteral sources of information. informationpresented to the learner. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 273
  • 11. Modelsof Learning However, though based on constructivist rheto- the student is guided so that he/she reaches the ric, most CAI and computer-based training predefined knowledge built into the system. (CBT) have provided drill and practice tutorials However, CAI may ease the cognitive load of that presented information in a highly structured, sorting through material and may enable stu- linear fashion. Thus, while purportingto individu- dents to process information at their own pace. alize instruction and allow individuals to process Thus, CAI, CBT, and ILS can be viewed as en- information according to their preferred learning hancing the cognitive information processing of style, CAI and CBT primarilyserved as reliable students by making the learning process more and consistent delivery sources of course mate- individuallytailored. rial. Advances in technology enabled the devel- opment of more interactive CAI that was less structured and gave more control over the se- Distance Learning quence of information presentation to the Distance learning is the transmission of a learner. These systems are sometimes referred course from one location to another. The goal is to as interactive learning systems (ILS); yet to provide education to locations that might not these too are based on ensuring that learners have the resources to offer courses or enable are exposed to predetermined knowledge even employees to take a course without leaving the though much more of the control for the se- organization's premises. There are many exam- quencing of the information is given to the ples of distance learning. One example is TI-IN learner. Network, Inc., a Texas-based private company While studies of CAI have found increased that provides over 30 high school courses and staff development opportunities via satellite to learning (Clark, 1986), these results could also be attributed to aspects incorporated into the more than 250 subscribing school districts and other educational agencies in Texas as well as system such as feedback, drilland practice, and 20 other states. Experienced and qualified in- self-paced progression that are independent of the technology (i.e., they could be incorporated structors holding at least a master's degree in into other non-computer media). For example, the subject broadcast their courses from studios one study comparing manual drill-and-practice in San Antonio, and the schools receive the sig- to computer-based drill-and-practice found that nals via satellite. In Minnesota, rural school dis- it was not the media (the computer) that affected tricts use a system of fiber optics, multiple video monitors, and cameras to link together class- performance, but rather the drill-and-practice method itself that was just as effectively carried rooms up to 78 miles apart so that the teacher out manually as with the computer (Clark,1991). can see the students in up to three other loca- tions simultaneously. The originating classroom While CAI, CBT, and ILS vary, pedagogical as- has one camera on the teacher, one on the stu- sumptions regarding the way these technologies dents, and one on the teachers' desk (U.S. Con- improve learning typically include: learners learn gress, 1988). MBA programs in Arizona, more effectively and efficiently when they are in California, Monterrey (Mexico), and Western control of the pace, feedback is a critical part of Ontario (Canada), among others, provide video effective learning, and active involvement leads conferencing alternatives to attending regular to more effective learning than passive involve- classes. ment. Thus, CAI is based on the stimulus-re- Distance learning supports the objectivist model sponse-feedback views of learning that are associated with the objectivist model of learning. of knowledge transmission, only now the knowl- Though CAI may enable more efficient interac- edge is transmitted to students at different loca- tions. From a learning theory perspective, it can tion, interacting with the computer cannot be taken as a substitute for human interaction. CAI be argued that distance learning supports the is therefore more rooted in the objective rather sociocultural model of learning by allowing stu- than collaborative or sociocultural models of dents to remain embedded in their cultural envi- ronments rather than forcing them to adopt a learning. The structure built into the system tends to prevent constructivist learning because new culture. However, the learners are still it enables learners to construct new knowledge; forced to adopt the language and culture of the 1995 274 MISQuarterly/September
  • 12. Modelsof Learning instructor since the instructor remains the nu- that information is being delivered by the in- cleus of the class. Distance learning facilities structor. This pedagogical assumption is closely can be equipped with facilities to enable stu- linked to the objectivist model of learning. By dents to communicate with each other and enabling an instructorto ask questions based on hence to promote collaborative learning across material being covered and to assess the de- distances. Such environments are examined in gree of understanding by the responses, key re- the section "InformatingDown." sponse pad technology facilitates more effective knowledge transmission and comprehension. The technology is secondarily related to cogni- The vision to informateup: tive information processing. The technology pro- providingan instructoraccess to motes feedback on students' learning. information An extension of key response pad technology The vision to informate up is defined as the goal would be to provide a full keyboard so that stu- of using IT as a management control tool to dents could ask and answer questions using full keep managers informed of detailed aspects of sentences. Such a facility is provided at the Uni- their organization's performance (Schein, 1992). versity of Arizona's electronic classroom "Exem- In an educational context, such a vision would plar" (Briggs, et al., 1992; Briggs and Ramesh, entail giving the instructor feedback concerning 1992). The students' inputs are anonymously student understanding of class material in a displayed on a common screen. The professor timely fashion so that the instructor could clarify can then discuss each input. In this case, the misunderstandings and misinterpretations. As- technology is more closely linked to the cogni- pects of typical college classrooms that prevent tive information processing model of learning. informating up may include student proclivity to One weakness with the question and answer fa- be reticent during class, lack of effective cues to cility of Exemplar is its infeasibility for large let the instructor know when information is being classes. In a large class of 30 or more students, misconstrued, and the unavailability of the in- it would be very time-consuming for the instruc- structor at the time when the student has a tor to go down the list of responses. This would question. One technological response is key re- likely lead to a great deal of boredom. Students sponse pads; another is e-mail between instruc- whose responses were not discussed by the in- tors and their students. structor would receive negative reinforcement for the desired participative behavior and might tend to not contribute to future questions. Such Key Response Pads questions as the ideal class size and the level of Key response pads enable a large class of stu- learning possible with response pad technology dents to participate by responding to questions should be addressed in future research. with a yes/no response or rating agreement to an issue on a scale from 0 to 9. The goal of key Electronic Mail Between Instructor and response pad technology is to make the instruc- Students tor more aware of whether students are follow- ing the content being discussed so that he/she Another technology that can informate up is can modify the flow and intensity of information electronic mail between instructors and students transfer if necessary. For instance, a study of outside of the classroom.7 Electronic mail allows IBM's electronic training facility shows that while students to ask questions as they are reviewing the lecture mode of teaching was much more material outside of class and to receive delayed time-efficient in terms of the material covered, the attentiveness of the students was greater in 7 Electronic mail is a technologythat can be used to support the "facilitation"mode in which frequent student several of the visions. The natureof the use willthereforebe responses were elicited via key response tech- specifiedto indicatewhy it is relevantto the particularvision nology (Horowitz, 1988). being discussed. For informatingup, e-mail between instructorsand students is relevant, whereas student-to- Key response pad technology assumes that the student e-mail is relevant for informating down or virtual instructor is the nucleus of the classroom and learningdepending the contextof use. on MIS Quarterly/September 1995 275
  • 13. Modelsof Learning feedback from the instructor. Electronic mail The vision to informatedown: might facilitate communication between stu- dents and instructors, particularly in large (30 providingstudents greater access students plus) classes, that tends to discourage to information questions. The delay in feedback from a cogni- Informating down is the use of technology to tive perspective is undesirable, yet the ability to provide information to lower levels in an organi- ask the question as it arises might outweigh the zation. Informatingdown is, in Schein's words, a disadvantage of the delayed response. "more radical IT use" than automating or infor- mating up because it may usurp the control of One account of electronic mail's value to stu- senior and middle management and demystify dents is the "dial a teacher" electronic mail pro- their role in the organization. In the context of vided by educational psychology professors at education, informating down provides informa- the Stephen F. Austin University to student tion to students to allow them to critically ana- teachers. Student teachers addressed questions lyze information or discuss issues among a set to the "experts" concerning child behavioral of peers. In this section, informating down tech- problems, course preparation problems, and in- nologies are examined in two broad categories: structional problems. Many of the messages re- the provision of information to learners and the ceived from the student teachers requested help provision of communication facilities to learners. with lesson-plan ideas on specific topics or cer- Technologies designed to provide information to tain kinds of individual discipline problems learners are referred to as Information Class- (Lowe, 1993). A similar system is used at Iowa room Technologies, and technologies designed State University. Patterns of communication to provide communication facilities to learners there found that the most common topic of com- are referred to as Communication Classroom munication for new teachers was on general Technologies. Such technologies can be imple- education issues, followed by technical issues mented in ordinary classrooms and do not as- and classroom management issues (Thompson sume the building of a special physical facility to and Hayes, 1993). house the technology. Electronic mail solicits feedback concerning stu- dent understanding of course material and hence, promotes the cognitive information processing Information Classroom Technologies model of learning. It is, however, unclear whether this feedback is similar in quality to that obtained Information classroom technologies facilitate via a traditional verbal question-and-answer student access to information to improve the session. A study of electronic mail in organiza- availability or reality of learning materials. In tions found that 62 percent of the messages contrast to automated classrooms that improve constituted "new" information-information re- the efficiency of information delivery, the goal here is to make new, qualitatively better informa- spondents reported they would not have other- wise sent or received (Sproull and Kiesler, tion available that would otherwise not be. 1986). People felt more comfortable sending Learning networks, hypermedia, simulations, and virtual reality are information classroom messages to superiors than to subordinates. If these results hold in an education environment, technologies. students might feel more comfortable asking Learning Networks: Learning networks are certain questions electronically than face to comprised of networked computers with links to face. Contrary to media richness theory, e-mail shared databases developed by educators at has been found to be a preferred communica- various locations or to external databases. One tion medium for equivocal and ambiguous mes- study suggests that graduate business class- sages (EI-Shinnaway and Markus, 1992), and rooms should be information-intensive environ- once a work group is familiar with a topic, e-mail ments containing such features as online is preferred to face-to-face communication access to real-world data available from com- (Zack, 1993). mercial providers, access to company-specific 1995 276 MISQuarterly/September
  • 14. Modelsof Learing databases, access to a wide varietyof software an informationresource to be utilized during for data manipulationand analysis and so on class to allow students to search for information (King,et al., 1990). The CATTsystem (Hashim, relevantto a course topic seems immense, and et al., 1991), developed to complementthe case research examininguses of the Internet and the teaching method, features current information World WideWeb is much needed. from publiclyavailable databases such as ag- The hypermediaformatis expected to encour- gregate industrial annual data, U.S. census age thinking, speculation, and personal judg- data, and NYSE and AMEXdaily returns.Using ments on the part of the learner because the such data, students are able to develop and learneris responsiblefor organizingand analyz- analyze alternativesto the case problem.Infact, ing information (Ambrose, 1991). On the one one study demonstrates that graduatebusiness hand, hypermediacould be considered the ulti- student groups that had access to publicly avail- mate tool for a cognitive information processing able financial informationvia computers per- theorist:"because hypertextis a node-linksys- formedsignificantly betterin case analyses than tem based uponsemanticstructures opposed [as study groups that had to analyze the same to a sequential access system] hypermediacan cases withoutaccess to such information (King, map fairlydirectlythe structureof knowledge it et al., 1990). Examples at lowereducationallev- is presenting"(Ambrose, 1991); on the other els of learning networks include Video for Ex- hand, for students withvery littleworkingknowl- ploringthe World,which gives quick access to edge in a domain, the seeming lack of struc- data such as humanand animalmotion,and the ture may be disconcerting and may hinder Jason project, which gives students access to processing. data being gathered by underwaterexplorers (Rubin,1993).8 Simulation Technologies and Virtual Reality: Simulation technology is anothermediumof the Learning networks are linked to the construc- information classroom. Simulation providea can tivist model of learning:students are construct- condensed or vicariousexperience and is based ing new knowledge from existing information on the belief that students learn best when they sources. There is no single correctinterpretation rather experience the subject or topic. For instance, nor answer to be given by the instructor; the students formtheirown ideas fromthe infor- groups of students using computersimulations have been foundto outperform controlgroups in mationthey gatherand explore. problem-solvingtasks (Gorrell and Downing, Hypermedia: Hypermedia providesa non-linear 1989). An example of a simulationis a com- means of browsingand sortingthroughcomput- puter-assisted internationalnegotiation project erized information. Learning networkscan be or- (Torney-Purta, 1993) in which teams of five-12 ganized in a hypermediaformatto encourage college students role-play diplomats from an- students to search the materialin the manner other countryand negotiate international issues that suits their own system of logic. One of the throughthe use of a computer-networking sys- features of the Universityof Maryland's AT&T tem. Students acquire practice in higher-order Teaching Theater is the use of hypermediato thinkingabout social issues, in defending their display lecture notes (Norman,1992). Students positions, and in defending their ideas. Simula- can navigate throughmaterial duringclass while tions are based on the constructivistmodel of the instructoris giving a lecture. Perhaps the learning-that learners need to be actively in- most widely knownhypermedia tool in academic volved in learningby workingwith real-lifefacts circles is the WorldWide Web, used by both in- or objects. structorsand students to engage in information Virtualrealityis another information classroom seeking and analysis. Althoughwe are unaware technology. Virtualrealityprovides "panoramic" of research that examines the potentialof the World Wide Web in the context of classroom presentations in three dimensions to the eyes, ears, and hands of a user. One example is a analyses, the potentialof the Web to serve as Britishhigh school that introduced design of the 8 The May 1993 issue of the Communications the ACM of a virtualcity where differentlanguages are spo- Classrooms in contains several examples of Information ken to teach foreign languages (Kerney,1993). elementary secondaryeducation. and This gives the course a more realistic context 1995 277 MISQuarterly/September
  • 15. Modelsof Learning than would be possible through any other tion. Studies indicatean increase in participation means aside from sending the students to the in classes taught using electronic peer-to-peer country.Otherproposed applicationsincludevir- communication. The technology encourages all tual realityfor use in historywhereby students members of the class to contribute class dis- to could create a virtualrealityEgyptiancity where cussion (Bump, 1990). A typical session in a they can enter, "walk" through, and discourse class enrolling 18 undergraduates involved with ancient Egyptians,for use in medical edu- more than 100 messages contributed 18 par- by cation whereby students could workon medical ticipants. Approximately60 percent were ad- emergencies in a virtualhospital, or for use in dressed by students to other students rather science whereby students could create and visit than to the instructor(Slatin, 1990). Ina two-day a virtualsolar system withplanets correctin ap- period, in the English Department'selectronic pearance, relative size, and distance from the classroom at the University Texas, 200 elec- of sun (Kerney,1993). tronic comments were made of which only 10 Virtualreality is based on the assumption that percent were teacher comments. Twenty-eight the most effective learningis thatwhich is expe- percentof the studentcomments (comprising 90 riential,or based on actual experience in a con- percent of the total)were student to student, 61 text that is similarto where learninghas to be percent were directed toward the whole class, later applied. A virtualrealityenvironmentsup- and only 13 percent were of the student to teacher or teacher to student variety (Butler, ports constructivist,cooperative,and sociocultu- ral learning: in designing the virtual reality, 1990). students are actively involved in constructing their knowledge of the particulardomain for Groupware-SupportedSynchronous which the virtualrealityis being built.Students Communication work together to construct the virtualworld by contributing their own views of how the reality in Similarly, synchronous communicationclass- should operate (much of which willbe based on rooms using groupware,students collaborating and theirown values, understanding, culture). with the technology were found to have higher perceived levels of skill development, higher perceived learning,and higher perceived inter- Communication Technology Classrooms est than students collaboratingin a classroom without electronic support (Alavi, 1994). In a Informatingdown can also be achieved with similarstudy reportedin this issue, Alavi, et al. communication-intensive classrooms. An elec- tronic classroom built around communication (1995) added groups that were comprised of students from two differentuniversities(distant technology can be as simple as providing elec- tronicmail to facilitatepeer-to-peercommunica- groups). They compared their satisfaction, per- ceived learning climate, and performance to tion to as complex as CATT (mentionedabove), which, in addition to the information features groups of students fromthe same university(lo- cal groups) engaged in three one-hour-and-fif- previously mentioned, incorporatesgroupware teen-minute collaborative learning sessions to facilitatecase discussions outside the physi- cal boundariesof a classroom (Rathnam,et al., using groupware-supported synchronous com- munication technology. The study concluded 1992). Such groupware-supported facilities that the distant groups perceived a more posi- mightalso be equippedwithsoftwareto provide tive learningclimate and performedbetter on a structureto the conversation. multiplechoice test of learning but that there was no significant difference in satisfaction Synchronous Communication Classrooms measures. The only complaintreceived in an- othergroupwarefacility was the lack of structure Synchronous communicationclassrooms pro- (Jessup, 1993). Some groupware-supported vide computers on student desks that are net- classrooms embed structureto facilitateconver- worked with software such as Lotus Notes, sation and reduce informationoverload (e.g., enablingsimultaneouspeer-to-peercommunica- and CATT EXEMPLAR). 1995 278 MISQuarterly/September
  • 16. Modelsof Learning Research at anothersynchronous communication dustry (Schein, 1992). The role of hierarchy classroomexaminedwhethertechnology-enabled would change in that distributed information collaborative learninginvolving case analyses is would make local problemsolving and lateralin- superior to individual constructive learninginvolv- formation sharing much more feasible. ITwould ing individual case analyses. The goal of both make it possible for an organization be simul- to these methodswas to increasestudentinterestin taneously centralizedaroundbasic strategy and the course, increase studentunderstanding the of goals and decentralizedaround implementation and material, promote criticalthinking (Leidner and and control. Power and authoritywould shift Fuller,1995). Studentsengaged in eight 1.5-hour away from position and status toward knowl- case analyses duringthe course of the semester. edge and information, leadershipwould be- and The study foundthat studentsworking collabora- come less of a role and more of a "function"; tivelyvia anonymousgroupware eithersmallor in more emphasis would fall on groups and team- largegroupswere more interestedin the material work. In the context of education, the vision to and perceivedthemselves to learnmorethanstu- transformwould involve using IT (1) to redraw dents who worked individually. study also The the physical boundariesof the classroom, (2) to found that students who workedindividually out- enable more teamwork,(3) to allow learningto performed students who collaborated small or in be a continuoustime-independent process, and large groups. This may suggest that thoughcol- (4) to enable multi-level,multi-speedknowledge laborating, students were not processingand as- creation. The notion of virtuallearning spaces similatingthe information; though exposed to a begins to operationalize these assumptions. diversity ideas, theydidnotincorporate ideas of the Virtuallearningspaces are those that linkgeo- intotheirown cognitive framework. merits This fur- therresearchbecause a primary of communi- graphically dispersed students withno time con- goal straints. Virtual learning spaces sustain cationtechnologyclassroomsis notjustto expose discourse throughinterruptions across dis- and studentsto more ideas, butto enablethemto criti- tances and give it continuity over time callyevaluatea diversity ideas in the creation of of (Scaradamaliaand Bereiter, 1993). Hence, we their of own interpretation important issues. distinguish between informatingdown class- The pedagogical assumptions underlyingsyn- rooms that can allow students to engage in col- chronouscommunication classrooms are that(1) laborativesessions across distances when the participation criticalto universitylearning,(2) is collaborativesessions are time-controlled (such lack of participation primarily is attributable to as with the Alavi, et al. (1995) work previously student inhibitions abouttalkinginfrontof others, mentioned)from virtuallearningspaces where (3) anonymitywill allow students to freely ex- the communication forms the basis of the press themselves and overcometheirinhibitions, course itself and is conducted at will-when the and (4) synchronous communicationtechnolo- students want and for as long as they want. Vir- gies providean efficientmechanismforproviding tual learningspaces can exist to allow a group anonymity. The firstassumptionmaps closely to of students withinthe same course to communi- the cooperative model of learningespecially if, cate at will(as withthe CATT system) or to bring for practicalreasons, the class is divided into together students from various courses at vari- smallerdiscussion groups. The thirdassumption ous universities worktogether. to can arguably be used to enable sociocultural learning.By providing anonymity and non-verbal communication, different culturesare allowed to express themselves withouthavingto adopt the Asynchronous Communication Across languageor opinionsof the dominating culture. Distances The simplest virtual learning spaces are founded on electronicmail and electronic bulle- A vision to transform: virtual tin boards. Press (1993) considers e-mail a low- continuous learningspaces tech innovationthat can have a radicalimpact The ITvision to transform the basis for a com- is on curriculum, commutingpatterns,frequencyof class meetings, and student-instructorroles. An plete transformation an organizationand in- of example of an asynchronouscommunication vir- MISQuarterly/September 1995 279
  • 17. Modelsof Learning tual learningspace is a graduateeducationclass Table 3 shows the linkages between the tech- taught at the University Texas. The students of nologies and the models of learning. No vision meet in a classroom only three times duringthe of technology is more desirable than others. semester.The rest of the course takes place using Rather, the most appropriatetechnology de- asynchronouselectronicmail.The discussionsvia pends on the underlyingmodel of learningthat electronicmail were not only multi-level (several the instructorwishes to employ. themes being discussed) butalso multispeed (dif- We have not investigated the specific course ferentaspects of a theme beingaddressed by dif- content and student characteristicsto which the ferent participants)(Harris, 1993). In another variousvisions may be most appropriate. Future project and (Knoll Jarvenpaa, 1995),studentsfrom researchers can addess these issues. For ex- over 10 universitiesfromnearlyall continents are teamed up to work in globallydispersed virtual ample, in the domainof business education,de- teams. Forsix weeks, the studentscompleteteam cision-making skills including analytical and problem-solving skills and communicationskills assignmentswithout face-to-facecontactwith any are seen as critical.We mightthereforespecu- their team members using electronicmail and late that methods requiring interactionand stu- computerconferencingtechnologies.An example dent involvement would be preferred over in secondary education is geographicallydis- traditionalmethods. Thus, the informating or up persed teams of studentsworking togetherto ac- tasks associatedwithscience projects or transforming technologies with the correspond- complish environmental studies(Hawkins, ing collaborativeor constructivistlearningmod- 1993). els might be ways to improve the quality of business education. Groupware-SupportedAsynchronous Communication Across Distances Groupware-supported communication class- rooms when designed for students to access from remote terminalscan also become virtual The Taxonomy of the Impact learningspaces. Anonymity be builtin or the can of ITon Learning identitiesof the group may be known.The addi- tion of the groupwareto the asynchronouscom- The previous discussion of the relationshipbe- to municationacross distances purports provide tween technologyand learningsuggests the fol- structuring mechanisms to the exchange of lowingtaxonomy (see Figure2). The taxonomy messages in orderto help learnersorganizethe suggests the impactof the fourclasses of learn- information they share. ing technologies on two process dimensions: (1) controlof the pace and content of learning The main pedagogical assumptionof the virtual and (2) the purpose of instruction(knowledge learning space is that learning is a process of or dissemination knowledgecreation). The taxon- workingtoward a more complete and coherent omy also suggests possible impacts of the vi- understanding.The flow of information must al- sions on a numberof well-established learning low for progressive work in a problem, with outcomes from education research (see Table ideas remainingactive over extended periodsof 4). IS researchers should find it useful to draw time. Furthermore, learningis viewed as ongo- upon well-established variables from education ing and need not occur as single well-defined research ratherthan creating new variables as topics covered in a finiteperiodsuch as duringa they pursue research in the area. Althougha re- class period. In this way, the virtuallearning view of the educationalresearch comparingthe space supportscognitive,constructivist, collabo- effectiveness of the models is beyond the scope rative,and sociocultural learningmodels. of this paper, Table4 lists the learningoutcome variables that typicallyform the foundation of educational methodologyresearch. Most of the Summary research discussed thus far examines one or Table 2 summarizes the technologies and the more of these learningoutcome variables;they are summarizedhere for convenient reference. assumptions discussed above. Examining leamingoutcomevariables well-defined 1995 280 MISQuarterly/September
  • 18. Models of Learning Table 2. Electronic Classroom Types, Assumptions, and Related Models of Learning Electronic Classroom Type Principal Pedagogical Assumptions The Vision to Automate InstructorConsole Instructorthe center of the classroom activity. Presentation technologies can make the delivery of information more memorable and interesting. Instructor Console and Stand-Alone Students learn better if they can emulate what the instructor is doing Student Computers on the computer. Learning is more effective when it is interactive. Computer-Assisted Learning Students benefit when they control the pace of learning. Feedback should be frequent. Distance Learning Weakness in education is the lack of availability of good courses and faculty. Accessibility in remote locations or smaller schools can be efficiently provided via telecommunications. The Vision to Informate Up Key Response Pads The instructor needs feedback. The abilityto elicit responses via technology is superior to hand-raising. Instructor-Student E-mail Feedback, even delayed, is better than no feedback. Limited access to instructors limits communication. The Vision to Informate Down Learning Networks Delivery of information is not a pressing problem, but rather the lack of current informationfrom realistic contexts. Students create knowledge through information exploration. Hypermedia/Internet Students need to create their own knowledge structures. Simulation/VirtualReality The more real the context, the more effective the learning. Students should be provided the means to experience the phenomenon during class. Synchronous Communication Participation is critical to the learning process. Classrooms Anonymity encourages participation. Groupware-Supported Synchronous Structure imposed on communication is effective in helping students Communication Classrooms learn. Communication is more efficient when structured. The Vision to Transform Virtual Continuous Learning Spaces Asynchronous Communication Learning is an ongoing process. Across Distances Time should be flexible. Learning need not be geographically dependent. Groupware-Supported Asynchronous Ad hoc communication is more effective when supported with a Communication Across Distances structure. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 281
  • 19. Modelsof Learning Table 3. Technology Fit With the Theories of Learning Objectivist Constructivist Collaborative CognitiveIP Sociocultural The Vision to Automate Instructor Console xx Instructor Console and Stand- xx x Alone StudentComputers Computer-Assisted Learning XX Distance Learning XX The Vision to InformateUp Key Response Pads XX X E-mail Instructor-Student The Vision to InformateDown Learning Networks XX Hypermedia/Internet XX XX SimulationNirtual Reality XX SynchronousCommunication XX x Classrooms Synchro- Groupware-Supported XX XX X Classrooms nous Communication The Vision to Transform AsynchronousCommunication XX X Across Distances Asynchronous Groupware-Supported XX i XX AcrossDistances Communication match; X representsa secondarymatch XXrepresentsthe primary 1995 282 MISQuarterly/September
  • 20. Modelsof Learning as dependent measures in studies of the impact tor of the knowledge. Rather,students develop of IT-facilitatedlearning will promote greater shared tacit knowledgefrom existing explicitin- and of comparability interpretability findings. formation.The structureis thus a ringstructure where the students become a very important Technologiesservingthe automation function are partof the knowledge creation process and the closely aligned with objectivisttheory, in which instructorserves as a mediator rather than a case the instructor remainsthe centerof attention and in controlof the learningprocess. The struc- dictator of the learning process; students will tureof the class can be describedas a knowledge therefore learn more/less depending on their tree or knowledgehierarchy, the instructor with as own contributionto the knowledge creation the creatorof knowledge.The instructor transfers process. Technologiesthat informatedown are most properlyused in a constructiveor collabo- explicitknowledgeto studentswho are expected rative environment,with an emphasis on con- to be able to applythe knowledge. automation The visionpromotesthe efficient of transfer knowledge ceptual learningand higher-order thinking. can It even be arguedthat such technologies woulddo thoughleavingthe processingof the knowledge by littlemore than frustratelearnersin an objective students as well as the creationof knowledgeby instructors unchanged.Therefore, impact IT the of environment-forcing them to search for the on learning limited an ephemeral is to effecton the rightanswer when it would be easier to be told. self-variables.Nevertheless, where the goal of The potentialexists for a longer-termeffect on educationis factual/procedural the self-variablessince the controlhas been al- knowledge transfer, the vision to automatecan be effectiveand per- most entirelyshiftedto the learner. formanceimproved.9 Lastly,technologies with the potentialto trans- formeducationwere discussed. Such technolo- Technologiesthat informateup similarly function to assist the instructor the nucleus of class as gies demand a rethinking the purpose of the of activitybut also functionto improvethe informa- physical classroom facilities. The transforma- tion an instructorreceives concerning student tionalvision is enabled by communication tech- comprehension of material.The structurecan nologies that allow individualsto share tacit be described as a star,withthe instructor the as knowledge in a manner uninhibitedby time or center but receivinginputfromthe students. The location.Of all the visions presented, the vision to transformgives the greatest amount of con- purpose of instruction still focused on knowl- is trol over the learning process to the learners. edge dissemination, but recognitionis given to This demands extensive preparation the part the importanceof ensuring understanding in- or on ternalization the material.Controlof the pace of of the instructor-even more than the other vi- and content of instruction still held by the in- is sions-to develop materialsappropriate such for structor.As with the vision to automate, there a learningenvironmentand to monitorthe pro- may be temporaryeffects on the self-variables gress being made in the discussions as an ob- as well as improvementsin factual and proce- server and as a guide. Knowledge is not durallearning,but achievingconceptuallearning constructed from existing explicit sources but and higher-orderthinkingin an informating-up rathercreated fromthe tacit knowledge held by environment individualsparticipating part of a dynamic as may be difficult. structure.The tacit knowledgeof the individuals Technologiesthat informate down place muchof comprising the class is shared, and a new the controlof the contentand pace of learningin shared tacit knowledge emerges among the the hands of students. The purpose of instruc- members. The structureis dynamicin the sense tion moves away fromknowledgedissemination that different members have more or less impor- toward knowledge creation; however, much of tance at differentperiods of time depending on the knowledge is already created (is explicit), the amount and qualityof the tacit knowledge but the instructor no longer the primary is crea- they have to contributeto the knowledge crea- tion of the entire group. Such a vision enables 9 Thus, to the extent that effective performance definedby is higher-order cognitionand conceptual learning. the goal of learning, the taxonomy does not predict Itis this vision thatdemands the greatest shiftin differencesin performance across the visions(although there the roles of instructorsand students and may willbe different types of performance across the visions). meet withresistance on the partsof both. MIS Quarterly/September 1995 283
  • 21. t, o co 0 a) Automating Informating Up Informating Down Transformin CD Technology InstructorConsole Keypad Response Learning Networks Virtual Lear CAI/CB1 Instnictor-Studenteinail Virtual Reality (b Distance Learning Simulations tr InstructorConsole ,ad Student Workstations Commnunications Classrooms CD Classroom -k Structure Hierarchy/Tree Star Ring Dynamic co COl Model Objective Objective, Cognitive IP I Constructive, Cognitive IP Collaborativ Collaborative I Sociocultura PROCESS DIMENSIONS Instructor Control of Pace, Content Knowledge Purpose of Instruction Dissemination 4 OUTCOME DIMENSIONS Ephemeral Impact on Self-Variables (motivation, interest, self-efficacy) Factual/Procedural Impact on Levels of Learning ,4- Lower-order Impact on Cognition Thinking ^ Low Impact on Behavior--participation and attention Improvementson Impact on Behavior--performance factual/procedural ts Figure 2. Taxonomy of the Impact of ITon Learning
  • 22. Modelsof Learning Table 4. Educational Method Research Variables Self-Variables References Self-efficacy The degree to whicha studentfeels capable of learning Cennamo,et al., 1991 froma given method. Grusec, 1992 Martoochie Webster, & Affective The degree of satisfactionwithand interestin learning 1992 froma given method. Hidi,1990 Baldwin Kar,1987 and Motivation The degree to whicha studentis motivated a by method. particular Learning Levels Context The basis of course material, dividedaccording typically Walberg&Haertel,1992 and to factual,procedural, conceptual. Tennyson, 1992 Davidson,1990 LearningStyle mode of learning, psychological The preferred a Bostrom,et al., 1990 measure. Hambree,1992 Fourqurean, al., 1990 et Cognitive ThinkingLevel Higher-order versus lower-order thinking thinking. Tenebaum,1982 1983 Bruning, Strategies strategiesused by studentsto learn. The metacognitive Walberg&Haertel,1992 The ability learnersto identify strategies of the necessary for understanding performing and tasks. Processing The amountand frequencywithwhichstudents process Tobias, 1982 new information. Bovy, 1981 Behavioral Performance A surrogatemeasure of the amountof learning. Attention A measure of directednon-verbal participation. Bostrom,et al., 1990 Participation The amountof usuallyverbalparticipation. Future Research Challenges search tradition in IS, and certainly learning envi- ronments provide an excellent opportunity to in- Numerous challenges remain in the area of im- corporate such technologies. This field of provements to management education, many of research deserves thorough attention, especially which require effort from IT researchers inter- such questions as whether structuring mecha- ested in educational environments. In reviewing nisms when incorporated into communication the literature on IT in education and developing classrooms facilitate information processing by the taxonomy presented in Figure 2, several ar- students or obstruct knowledge creation by forc- eas in need of research present themselves and ing consensus. However, avenues for other IT- are briefly discussed below. based methods to informate up or down should 1. Research is needed on technologies also be undertaken. In particular,attention needs that to be given to developing technologies to support informate down and up. informating up. This is the area that has been Research at the university level thus far has fo- given the least attention so far. It will be interest- cused primarily on the technologies to support ing to understand how communication patterns informating down via collaborative learning. are altered when e-mail is widely used between Collaborative technologies have a strong re- instructors and students and how to effectively MISQuarterly/September 1995 285
  • 23. Modelsof Learning use key response-pad technology to provide models of learning. Some studies of collabora- real-time feedback on students' learning. tive learning in a virtual learning space have supported the point that for mature, motivated learners this mode of learning can be more ef- 2. Research is needed on technology appli- fective than the traditional classroom, but for cations to promote sociocultural learning. less motivated and mature learners, the effect is Papert (1984) lamented in 1984 that few were the opposite (Hiltz, 1988; Singer, et al., 1988). looking for ways to use the computer to allow Students lacking the necessary basic skills and knowledge to be acquired and presented in a self-discipline may do better in a traditionallyde- form that matched different cultural and person- livered mode (Hiltz, 1988). Aside from these ality types. Little has changed since. There is a findings, little is known about the prerequisites need to discover ways to use information tech- to the effective application of informating down, nology to enable sociocultural learning-to im- informating up, and transformational technolo- merse students in the context of the material, yet gies in learning environments. It could well be enabling them to communicate and contribute that the brightest and most motivated students their own ideas and values based upon their own will prefer to learn in an individual competitive culture. These goals well support the multicultural environment rather than sharing their knowledge objectives to which many universities subscribe. with less motivated, less bright students. 3. Research is needed on the added value of In his theory of knowledge creation in organiza- technology to the learning models. tions, Nonaka (1994) suggests several enabling conditions of knowledge creation: creative It may be that merely augmenting the objec- tivist model with constructivist models will pro- chaos, autonomy, redundancy of information, duce the greatest learning impact and that requisite variety and intention. Nonaka suggests that without some form of shared experience, it technology changes will only contribute minor is extremely difficult for people to share each improvements. On the other hand, information others' thinking processes. This model of knowl- technology might serve as a catalyst and rein- forcer for effective applications of non-tradi- edge creation (called socialization) parallels the sociocultural model of learning. Nonaka further tional learning models. Consequently, future research needs to compare the effectiveness of suggests that the quality of an individual's contri- bution is determined by the "variety"of that indi- information technology incorporated into the vidual's experience. Bovy (1981) advances the model of learning versus the model without notion that high-ability students profit from the technology (rather than comparing one model of learning with technology to a different model opportunity to process information in their own of learning with or without technology). Such in- way and to create knowledge, whereas low-abil- ity students tend to be handicapped by such vestigations are encouraged to build on pre- vious work and as much as possible use empowerment. In addition, student reticence ob- served in traditional settings may be more the variables such as those listed in Table 4 that result of indolence rather than communication have been the center of much previous edu- inhibitions, in which case attempts to encourage cational methodology research. knowledge creation via teamwork, collaborative 4. Research is needed on the influence of learning models, and communication technolo- moderating variables on the learning gies might meet with insurmountable obstacles. models and their technological The lack of enabling conditions such as student enhancements. experience, student ability, and student effort The second section presented five models of may outweigh any gains to be achieved with learning but did not advance any model as the technology and thus should be examined before widespread investment in advanced technology. preferred model because the appropriate choice In addition, the instructor's skills in executing the depends on many factors such as course con- tent and student characteristics. There is little learning models and in adopting technology research that elaborates on the factors that enabling the models should be taken into ac- count before investing in the technologies. might affect the successful application of the 1995 286 MISQuarterly/September
  • 24. Modelsof Learning 5. Research is needed concerning the most ations to the learning experience. This also effective ways to foster teamwork as well as means that individual students will have differing the appropriate size and duration of teams. learning objectives and experiences, and there- fore, the assessment strategies must be both in- Teamwork is an implicit aspect of the collabora- dividualized and dynamic. Individual student tive and sociocultural models. In order to stimu- late creative thinking via discussion in a team, learning portfolios are increasingly used in such an environment (Becker, 1987). several conditions should exist: the dialectic should be multi-faceted rather than single-fac- In the virtual learning environment, the instructor eted, individuals should be able to express their provides visions for directions, orients the cha- ideas freely and candidly, and there should be otic situation that results from multiple individu- temporal continuity so as not to disrupt the crea- als simultaneously creating and sharing tion of knowledge (Nonaka, 1994). This suggests knowledge, and sets the deadline by which the a need for multiple channels of communica- visions will be realized. Effective instruction in tion-some continuous and a few anonymous. this context might mean asking the proper ques- Given the need for shared experiences, teams tions rather than guiding students toward the might remain stable over time and across proper responses, facilitating the sharing of in- courses even though the importance of the formation to enable knowledge to be con- members' contributions will vary depending on structed rather than constructing and distributing their existing knowledge. knowledge themselves, and monitoring rather than leading the knowledge creation process. Teamwork is a means of knowledge creation rather than an end in itself. Research needs to Students are likely to resist the new learning consider optimal team size, team leadership is- models as much as the instructors. In the virtual sues, team assessment strategies, and the im- learning space, students are as much responsi- pact of the longevity of the teamwork. Research ble for the quality and amount of learning as the also needs to consider the effects of teamwork instructor. Students accustomed to objective as- on the satisfaction of the learners. The studies sessment and clear topics may be unable to ad- on satisfaction must include virtual global stu- just to the additional responsibility placed on dent teams (e.g., Knoll and Jarvenpaa, 1995), them. This too demands student willingness to where members often come from different edu- forfeit the certainty of objective performance- cational institutions with differing educational based testing procedures for course assess- goals and assessment strategies and must con- ment procedures revolving around student sider the amount of the knowledge the learner contribution to the class. This is a fundamentally has to contribute versus the knowledge the different way for students to think about a learner gains from the sharing process. course; traditionally,students are accustomed to 6. Research is needed on understanding the thinking in terms of what they get out of a course rather than what they contribute to the roles of instructors and students as well as the appropriate knowledge created in a course. learning assessment strategies in virtual learning spaces. As one moves along the continuum in Figure 2, the classroom model becomes a ring or dy- namic topology with major implications for the Conclusion roles of students and instructors and also for as- As an examination of the models of learning and sessment, both of instructors and students. In of the impact of IT on learning elucidates, there virtual learning spaces, it is not known at the are varieties of opportunities for implementing IT outset exactly what knowledge will be acquired in management education. Technology can be and created. The virtual classroom thus pro- used to facilitate the display of information, to in- motes "creative chaos" (Nonaka, 1994), remov- crease access to external explicit information, ing traditional structure from the learning and to increase the sharing and construction of environment. The removal of structure means knowledge. By studying the interactions of the that individual students will have differing prepa- technology with learning models, as well as the MISQuarterly/September 1995 287
  • 25. Modelsof Learning individual technologies themselves, a picture Bostrom, R.P., Olfman,L., Sein, M.K."The Im- begins to emerge as to what constitutesalterna- portanceof Learning Style in End-UserTrain- tive implementations ITin education.Technol- of ing,"MIS Quarterly (14:1), March 1990, pp. ogy is not suggested as a panacea for 101-119. educational problems;in fact many problemsin Bovy, R.C. "SuccessfulInstructional Methods:A educationare social ratherthan learningrelated. CognitiveInformation Processing Approach," Yet, technology can enable the effectiveapplica- ECTJ(29:4), Winter1981, pp. 203-217. tion of constructive,cognitive,collaborative, and Briggs, R.O. and Ramose, V. "An Empirical sociocultural models of learning. Study of Classroom Dynamics Using Exem- plar,an ElectronicLearning SupportEnviron- ment Based on Cognitive LearningTheory," Acknowledgements workingpaper,MISDepartment, Universityof The authors are grateful for the helpful com- Arizona,Tucson,AZ,July 14, 1992. ments of the senior editor,the associate editor, Briggs, R.O., Ramose, V., Bass, K., and Car- and the reviewers. The authors are likewise lisle, J.P. "Exemplar: Improvingthe College Classroom with GroupSupportTechnology," gratefulto MarillaSvinickifor her comments on in Proceedings of the Thirteenth AnnualInter- learningtheories. Lastly,the authorsare grateful nationalConferenceon Information for travelfundinggiven by the BaylorCenterfor Systems, EducationTechnology. J. DeGross, J. Becker, and J. Elam (eds.), December 1992, p. 276 (availablefromAsso- ciationfor Computing Machinery, New York). Bruning, I.L. "An InformationProcessing Ap- References proach to a Theory of Instruction," ECTJ (31:2), Summer1983, pp. 91-101. Alavi, M. "Computer-Mediated Collaborative Bump,J. "Radical Changes in Class Discussion Learning: An Empirical Evaluation,"MIS Using Networked Computers,"working pa- Quarterly (18:2), June 1994, pp. 159-174. per, Department of English, University of Alavi, M., Wheeler,B.C., and Valacich,J.S. "Us- Texas,Austin,TX,1990. ing ITto Reengineer Business Education: An Butler,W. "TheConstruction Knowledgein an of Exploratory Investigation of Collaborative Electronic Discourse Community," working Telelearning," MIS Quarterly (10:3), Septem- of paper, Department English,The University ber 1995. of Texas,Austin,TX, 1990. Ambrose, D.W. "The Effects of Hypermedia on Carrier,C.A. and Sales, G.C. "Pairversus Indi- Learning: A LiteratureReview,"Educational vidualWorkon the Acquisition Concepts in of Technology,December 1991, pp. 51-55. a Computer-Based Instructional Lesson," Bagley, C. and Hunter,B. "Restructuring, Con- Journal of Computer Based Instruction structivism,and Technology:Forginga New (14:1), 1987, pp. 11-17. Relationship," Educational Technology,July Cennamo, K.S., Saveny, W.C., and Smith, P.L. 1992, pp. 22-27. "Mental Effort and Video-Based Learning: BaldwinT. and Kar, K. "The Developmentand The Relationshipof Preconceptions and the EmpiricalTest of a Measure for Assessing Effects of Interactiveand Covert Practice," Motivation Learn in Management Educa- to Educational TechnologyResearch and De- tion,"in Academy of ManagementBest Pa- velopment(39:1), 1991, pp. 5-16. per Proceedings, F. Hoy (ed.), Academy of Clark,R.C. "Defining 'D'in ISD:Part2: Task- the Management, New Orleans, LA, 1987, pp. Specific Instructional Methods," Performance 117-121. and InstructionJoumal, April1986, pp. 12-17. Becker, H.J. "Using Computerfor Instruction," Clark, R.E. "When Researchers Swim Up- Byte, February1987, pp. 149-162. stream:Reflections an Unpopular on Argument Benbasat, I. and Dexter,A.S. "AnExperimental About Learning from Media," Educational Evaluationof Graphicaland Color-Enhanced Technology, February 1991, pp. 34-40. Information Presentation," ManagementSci- Davidson, G.V. "Matching LearningStyles with ence (31:11),November1985, pp. 1348-1364. TeachingStyles: Is it a Useful Concept in In- 288 MIS 1995 Quarterly/September
  • 26. Modelsof Learning struction?" Performance and InstructionJour- The Harbus News. "PMD Program Gets Ad- nal, April 1990, pp. 36-38. vanced Multimedia Computer Network," stu- DeSanctis, G. "Computer Graphics as Decision dent newspaper of Harvard Business School Aids: Directions for Research," Decision Sci- (LVIII:111),Monday, April 11, 1994, pp. 1, 11. ences (15:2), 1984, pp. 463-487. Harris, J.B. "An Internet-based Graduate Tele- EI-Shinnaway, M.M. and Markus, M.L. "Media computing Course: Practicing What We Richness Theory and New Electronic Com- Preach," in Technology and Teacher Educa- munication Media: A Study of Voice Mail and tion Annual 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Electronic Mail," in Proceedings of the Thir- Willis, and J. Willis (eds.), Charlottesville, VA, teenth International Conference on Informa- 1993, pp. 641-645. tion Systems, J. DeGross, J. Becker, and J. Hashim, S., Rathnam, S., and Whinston, A.B. Elam (eds.), December 1992, pp. 91-106 "CATT: Argumentation Based Groupware An (available from Association for Computing System for Enhancing Case Discussions in Machinery, New York). Business Schools," Proceedings of the Fisher, C.G. and Grant, G.E. "IntellectualLevels Twelfth Annual International Conference on in College Classrooms," in Studies of College Information Systems, J. DeGross, I. Ben- Teaching: Experimental Results, Theoretical basat, G. Desanctis, and C. Beath (eds.), Interpretations, and New Perspectives, C.L. 1991, pp. 371-385 (available form Associa- Ellner and C.P. Barnes (eds.), D.C. Heath tion for Computing Machinery, New York). and Co., Lexington, MA, 1983, pp. 47-60. Hawkins, J. "Technology and the Organization of Flynn, J.L. "Cooperative Learning and Gagne's Schooling," Communications of the ACM Events of Instruction: A Syncretic View,"Edu- (36:5), May 1993, pp. 30-34. cational Technology, October 1992, pp. 53- Hidi, S. "Interest and Its Contribution as a Men- 60. tal Resource for Learning,"Review of Educa- Fourqurean, J.M., Meisgeier, C., and Swank, P. tional Research (60:4), Winter 1990, pp. "The Link Between Learning Style and 549-571. Jungian Psychological Type: A Finding of Hiltz, S.R. "Collaborative Learning in a Virtual Two Bipolar Preference Dimensions," Journal Classroom: Highlights of Findings," in Pro- of Experimental Education, Spring 1990, pp. ceedings of the Conference on Computer- 225-237. Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, OR, Garvin, D.A. "Buildinga Learning Organization," September 26-28, 1988 (available through Harvard Business Review, July-August 1993, Association for Computing Machinery, New pp. 78-91. York). Gist, T.E., McQuade, M.K., Swanson, R.E., Horowitz, H. "Student Response Systems: Inter- Lorenzen, G.L., Schmidt, S.R., Boudot, J.R., activity in a Classroom Environment," pre- and Fuller, R.G. "The Air Force Academy In- sented at Sixth Conference of Interactive tructor Workstation (IWS): II. Effectiveness," Instruction Technology for the Society of Ap- Journal of Educational Technology Systems plied Learning Technology, Portland, OR, (17:4), 1988-89, pp. 285-295. February 24, 1988. Gorrell, J. and Downing, H. "Effects of Com- Iran-Nejad, A., McKeachie, W., and Berliner, puter-Simulated Behavior Analysis on Pre- D.C. "The Multisource Nature of Learning: An Service Teacher's Problem Solving," Journal Introduction," Review of Educational Re- of Educational Computing Research (5:3), search (60:4), Winter 1990, pp. 509-515. 1989, pp. 335-347. Janda, K. "Teaching American Government in Grusec, J.E. "Social Learning Theory and Devel- an Electronic Classroom," presented at 85th opmental Psychology: The Legacies of Robert Annual Meeting of the American Political Sci- Sears and Albert Bandura," Developmental ence Association, Atlanta, GA, August 31- Psychology (28:5), 1992, pp. 776-786. September 3, 1989). Hambree, R. "Experiments and Relational Stud- Jessup, L.M. "IntegratingGroup Support System ies in Problem Solving: A Meta-Analysis," Research and Development with Instruction: Journal for Research in Mathematics Educa- Students Learn by Building a GSS Facility," tion (23:3), 1992, pp. 242-273. working paper, Information Systems Depart- MISQuarterly/September 1995 289
  • 27. Models Learning of ment, CaliforniaState University,San Mar- Educational Psychology (82:2), 1990, pp. cos, CA, 1993. 189-200. Jonassen, D.H. "Thinking Technology,"Educa- Neter, J. and Chervany, N. "Effectsof Use of tional Technology,January1993, pp. 35-37. Computerin FirstYear Statistics on Student Kerney,C.A. "HowSoon WillTeachers Use Vir- Attitudes," Decision Sciences (4:1), 1973, pp. tual Reality in the Classroom?"Technology 133-141. and Teacher Education Annual 1993, D. Nonaka, I. "ADynamicTheoryof Organizational Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Willis, and J. Willis Knowledge Creation,"OrganizationScience (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. 178- (5:1), February1994, pp. 14-37. 181. Norman,K. L. "The ElectronicTeaching Thea- King, W.R., Premkumar, and Ramamurthy, G., ter: InteractiveHypermedia and MentalMod- K. "An Evaluationof the Role and Perform- els of the Classroom,"CurrentPsychology ance of a Decision SupportSystem in Busi- Research & Reviews (9:2), Summer 1992, ness Education,"Decision Sciences (21:3), pp. 141-161. 1990, pp. 642-659. M. O'Loughlin, "Rethinking Science Education: Knoll,K. and Jarvenpaa,S.L. "Learning Work to Beyond Piagetian Constructivism Toward a in DistributedGlobalTeams,"Proceedings of SocioculturalModel of Teaching and Learn- the 28th HawaiiConferenceon Systems Sci- ing,"Joumal of Research in Science Teach- ences, Vol. 4, Maui, HI, 1995, pp. 92-101. ing (29:8), 1992, pp. 791-820. Lay, P. "InteractiveVideo Courseware: Prob- Papert, S. "New Theories for New Learnings," lems, Issues, and Practical Implications," School Psychology Review (13:4), 1984, pp. Journal of EducationalTechnologySystems 422-428. (18:4), 1989-1990, pp. 313-323. Press, L. "Technetronic Education:Answers on Leidner,D.E. "AnExamination Learning of Out- the Cultural Horizon," Communications the of comes in an AdvancedPresentation Electronic ACM(36:5), May1993, pp. 17-22. Classroom," workingpaper, Information Sys- Rathnam, S., Kalakota, R., Whinston, A.B., tems Department, Baylor University,Waco, Hashim, S., and Butterfield,J. "Developing TX, 1994. Information TechnologyforAugmenting Case Leidner, D.E. and Fuller, M.A. "Improving Stu- Discussions: CurrentStatus and Future Di- dent Processing and Assimilation Concep- of rections,"Proceedings of the ThirteenthIn- tual Information: GDSS Supported ternational Conference on Information Collaborative Learning vs. IndividualCon- Systems, J. DeGross, J. Becker,and J. Elam structive Learning,"workingpaper, Informa- (eds.), December 1992, pp. 43-58 (available tion Systems Department,BaylorUniversity, from Association for ComputingMachinery, Waco, TX, 1995. New York). Leidner,D.E. and Jarvenpaa,S.L. "TheInforma- Rubin,A. "VideoLaboratories: Tools for Scien- tion Age ConfrontsEducation:Case Studies tific Investigation,"Communicationsof the on ElectronicClassrooms,"Information Sys- ACM(36:5), May 1993, pp. 64-65. tems Research (4:1), March1993, pp. 24-54. Scardamalia,M. and Bereiter,C. "Technologies Lowe, M.E. "911 for StudentTeachers,"inTech- for Knowledge-Building Discourse,"Commu- nology and Teacher EducationAnnual1993, nications of the ACM (36:5), May 1993, pp. D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A.Willis, and J. Willis 37-41. (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. 672- Schein, E.H. "TheRole of the CEO in the Man- 674. agement of Change:The Case of Information Martocchio, J.J. and Webster, J. "Effects of Technology,"in Transforming Organizations, Feedback and CognitivePlayfulnesson Per- T.A. Kochan and M. Useem (eds.), Oxford formance in Microcomputer Software Train- University Press, New York,1992, pp. 80-95. ing," Personnel Psychology (45:3), 1992, pp. Schlechter,T.M."TheRelativeInstructional Effi- 553-578. ciency of Small Group Computer-Based McKeachie,W.J. "Researchon College Teach- Training," Joural of EducationalComputing Journal of ing: The HistoricalBackground," Research (6:3), 1990, pp. 329-341. 290 MIS 1995 Quarterly/September
  • 28. Models Learning of Shuell, T.J. "CognitiveConceptions of Learn- U.S. Congress,Officeof Technology Assessment. ing," Review of EducationalResearch, Win- Power On: Tools for Teachingand Leaming, ter, 1986, pp. 411-436. OTA-Set-379, U.S. GovernmentPrintingOf- Singer, J., Behrend,S., and Roschelle, J. "Chil- fice, Washington,D.C., September 1988. dren's CollaborativeUse of a ComputerMi- Walberg, H.J. and Haertel, G.D. "Educational croworld," Proceedings of the Conferenceon Psychology's FirstCentury," Journalof Edu- Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, cationalPsychology (84:1), 1992, pp. 6-19. Portland,OR, September 26-28, 1988 (avail- Watson, C.J. and Driver,R.W."TheInfluenceof able throughAssociation for ComputingMa- Computer Graphicson the Recall of Informa- chinery,New York). tion,"MIS Quarterly (7:1), March 1983, pp. Slatin,J.M."InterChange: Patternsof Interaction 45-53. in Classes Using a Real-TimeConferencing Whipple,W.R. "Collaborative Learning:Recog- System as a Mediumfor Instruction," working nizing It When We See It,"Bulletin of the of paper, Department English,The University American Association for Higher Education of Texas at Austin,Austin,TX, 1990. (40:2), October1987, pp. 3-7. Slavin, R.E. CooperativeLearing: Theory,Re- Yarusso, L. "Constructivism Objectivism," vs. search, and Practice, Prentice Hall, Engle- Performance and InstructionJoumal, April wood Cliffs,NJ, 1990. 1992, pp. 7-9. Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. "Reducing Social Zack, M.H. "Interactivity and Communication Context Cues: ElectronicMail in Organiza- Mode Choice in Ongoing Management tional Communication," ManagementScience Groups," Information Systems Research (32:11), November1986, pp. 1492-1512. (4:3), September 1993, pp. 207-239. Stephenson, S.D,"The Role of the Instructor in Zuboff,S. In the Age of the SmartMachine:The Computer-BasedTraining," Performanceand Futureof Work and Power, Basic Books, Inc. Instruction Joural, August 1992, pp. 23-26. New York,1988. Tenebaum, G. "TheEffectof Qualityof Instruc- tion on Higherand LowerMentalProcesses and On the Predication of Summative Aboutthe Authors Achievement," Joural of Educational Re- search (80:2), December 1982, pp. 105-114. DorothyE. Leidner,assistantprofessorat Baylor in University Waco, Texas, received her Ph.D. in Tennyson, R.D. "AnEducationalLearningThe- information systems in 1992 fromthe University ory for InstructionalDesign," Educational of Texas at Austinwhere she also received her Technology,January1992, pp. 36-41. Master'sand Bachelor'sdegrees. Her research Thompson, A. and Hayes, C. "Patternsof Use interests includeexecutive information of an ElectronicCommunication Networkfor systems, international issues, and electronicclassroom IS Student Teachers and FirstYear Teachers," technologies. She has published in Information Technology and Teacher EducationAnnual Systems Research, the Journalof Management 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Willis,and J. Information Willis (eds.), Charlottesville,VA, 1993, pp. Systems, Organization Science, and several conference proceedings. 680-683. Tobias, S. 'When Do Instructional MethodsMake Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa is an associate professor a Difference?" EducationalResearcher, April in the GraduateSchool of Business at the Uni- 1982, pp. 4-9. versity of Texas, Austin. Her research interests Torney-Purta, J. "Computer Networking and lie in the use of IT in global business, learning Collaborative Knowledge Construction:the organization,and using IT to enable organiza- ICONS Computer-AssistedInternational Ne- tionaltransformation. She serves as an associ- gotiation Project,"Technology and Teacher ate editor for Management Science, MIS EducationAnnual 1993, D. Carey, R. Carey, Quarterly,Information Systems Research, Da- D.A. Willis, and J. Willis (eds.), Charlottes- taBase, and the Journalof Computer-Mediated ville,VA, 1993, pp. 740-744. Communication. MISQuarterly/September 291 1995