Learning Paradigms for Educating a New Generation of Computer Science Students

In this paper challenges associated with a new generation of Computer Science students are examined. The mode of education in tertiary institutes has progressed slowly while the needs of students have changed rapidly in an increasingly technological world. The major learning paradigms and learning theories within these paradigms are studied to find a suitable strategy for educating modern students. These paradigms include Behaviourism, Constructivism, Humanism and Cogntivism. Social Learning theory and Elaboration theory are two theories that are further examined and a survey is done to determine how these strategies will be received by students. The results and findings are evaluated and indicate that students are fairly receptive to a method that incorporates both Social Learning theory and Elaboration theory, but that some aspects of all paradigms need to be implemented to create a balanced and effective strategy with technology as foundation.

Authors:

• J. M. Breed
• E. Taylor

Keywords:

• Computer Science
• Education
• Elaboration Theory
• Learning Paradigms
• Social Learning Theory.

References:

[1] A. K. Beerman, "Computer-based Multimedia: New Directions in
Teaching and Learning." Department of Food Science and Nutrition, pp.
15-18, 28 June, 1996.
[2] D. Tapscott, Growing up digital: The rise of the Net Generation. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
[3] D. G. Oblinger and J. L. Oblinger, Educating the Net Generation, Date
of access: 28 February 2012.
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf, 2005.
[4] M. Prensky, "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants" On The Horizon, vol.
9, no. 5, October, 2001.
[5] S. Bennett, K. Maton and L. Kervin, "The 'Digital Natives' debate: A
critical review of the evidence." British Journal of Educational
Technology, vol. 39 no. 5, 2008.
[6] G. E. Kennedy, T. S. Judd, A. Churchward and K. Gray, "First year
students' experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives?"
Australian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 24, no. 1, pp.108-
122, 2008.
[7] J. B. Caruso and G. Salaway, The ECAR Study of Undergraduate
Students and Information Technology, EDUCAUSE, 2008.
[8] H. Thinyane, "Are digital natives a world-wide phenomenon? An
Investigation into South African Students' use and experience with
technology." Computers & Education, vol. 55, pp. 406-414, 2010.
[9] T. Kramlinger and T. Huberty, "Behaviorism Versus Humanism" , pp.
41-45. December 1990.
[10] N. Friessen, "Mind and Machine: Eithical and epistemological
implications for research." AI & Society, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 83 - 92, 9
December 2009.
[11] B. F. Skinner, The Technology of Teaching, New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, 1968.
[12] B. F. Skinner, "Teaching Machines." Science, pp. 969-977, 1958.
[13] C. Guey, Y. Chengand S. Shibata, "A Triarchal instruction model:
integration of principles from Behaviorism, Cognitivism and
Humanism." Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 9, pp.
105-118, 2010.
[14] H. L. Petri and M. Mishkin, "Behaviorism, Cognitivsm and the
Neuropsychology of Memory." American Scientist, vol. 82, no. 1, pp.
30-37, January-February 1994.
[15] J. C. Smith, Historical Foundations of Cognitive Sciences. Dordrecht:
Springer, 1990.
[16] D. C. Leonard, Learning Theories A to Z. Westport: Greenwood Press,
2002.
[17] E. Von Glaserfeld, Ernst, "Constructivism in Education" in T. Husne
and T. N. Postlethwaite, eds. The International Encyclopedia of
Education, Oxford/New York: Pergamon Press, pp. 162-263, 1989.
[18] L. B. Resnick, Knowing, Learning and Instruction. Hillsdale: Lawrence
Erlbaum, 1989.
[19] D. N. Perkins, "Technology Meets Constructivism: Do They make a
Marriage?" Education Technology, pp. 18-23, May 1991.
[20] V. Richardson, "Constructivist Pedagogy." Teachers College
Record, vol. 105, no 9, pp.1623-1640, December 2003.
[21] S. Barab and K. Squire, "Design-Based Research: Putting a stake in the
ground." The Journal of the learning sciences, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1-14,
2004.
[22] P. Cobb, J. Confrey, A. Disessa, R. Lehrer, and L. Schauble, "Design
Experiments in Educational Research." Educational Researcher, vol.
32, no. 1, pp. 9-13, Jan/Feb 2003.
[23] A. Collins, D. Joseph and K. Bielaczyc, "Design Research: Theoretical
and Methodological Issues." The Journal of the learning sciences, vol.
13, no. 1, pp. 15-42, 2004.
[24] A. Collins, "Towards a design science of education." in E. Scanlon, and
T. O'Shea, eds. New directions in educational technology, Berlin:
Springer. pp. 15-22, 1992.
[25] W. Huitt, Humanism and open education. Date of access: 8 August
2012. http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affect/humed.html, 2009.
[26] N. Gage, and D. Berliner, Educational Psychology. Boston: Houghton,
Mifflin, 1991.
[27] G. R. Taylor, Practical application of Social Learning theories in
educating young African-American Males. Lanham: University Press of
America, 2003.
[28] A. Bandura, "Social Cognitive theory." in R. Vasta, ed. Annals of child
development, Greenwich: JAI Press, vol. 6, pp. 1-60, 1989.
[29] A. Bandura, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Prentice-Hall, 1986.
[30] R. Wood and A. Bandura, "Social Cognitive Theory of organizational
Management." The Academy of Management review, vol. 14, no. 3, pp.
361-384, July 1989.
[31] A. Bandura, "Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action." in
W. M. Kurtines and J. L. Gerwitz, eds. Handbook of moral behaviour
and development, Hillsdale: Erlbaum, vol. 1, pp. 45-103 1991.
[32] C. M. Reigeluth, Instructional-Design Theories and models. Mahwah:
Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999.
[33] G. Morrison, S. Ross, E. Kemp and H. Kalman, Designing Effective
Instruction. Chennai: Wiley and Sons, 2004.
[34] R. Mayer, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[35] D. A. Norman, Things that makes us smart: Defending Human attributes
in the age of the machine. New York: Addison-Wesley, 1993
[36] C. C. Schroeder, "New Students - New Learning Styles." Change, pp.
21-26, September/October 1993.