Constructionism and Instructionism are names for two approaches to educational innovation. Instructionism is the theory that says, “To get better education, we must improve instruction. And if we’re going to use computers, we’ll make the computers do the instruction.” And that leads into the whole idea of computer-aided instruction.

“Well, teaching is important, but learningis much more important. And Constructionism means “Giving children good things to do so that they can learn by doing much better than they could before.”"

Papert continues to provide examples of children using computers to design calendars and images whereby students have to insert the parameters of the shapes and lines they need to create the final product. Papert promotes the teaching of mathematics through developing projects so the student takes on the role of scientists, engineers and bankers. Students learning through activities which they can later relate to real life experiences before formal classes ensures that mathematics becomes intuitive and a love of learning is greatly increased. 

“[we need to] find ways in which the technology enables children to use knowledge, mathematical knowledge and other knowledge, not just store it in their heads so that twelve years later it’s going to be good for them”

whilst this is good in theory the practical application of Paperts methodology could prove problematic. Firstly it requires a very high level of software understanding by the teacher so they can answer students questions and use the technology appropriately. It could also cause problems with resources and classroom management. How is 1 teacher supposed to allow student creativity whilst teaching 30 students how to use the technology? Once students are familiar with the specific programs (LOGO is mentioned in the article) i perceive these problems to be reduced or eliminated.

Jeff Utecht’s 2008 article

“Just because” applications of technology are the ‘edutainment’ activities or the uses of technology that contribute very little or not at all to the learning experiences.

Utecht labels overhead projectors, word processing and internet research as ‘old things in old ways’ as the technology does not affect the learning experience. If those applications were removed or non existent than whilst the activity would be longer and harder the same result would be produced. A handwritten report on Antarctica, researched with an encyclopedia is the same as a typed, internet-based research project on the same topic.

‘Old things in new ways’ refers to using technology to enhance to old ways of doing things. Examples of this include using google earth instead of an atlas or downloading a video of an event instead of reading a newspaper article about it. The example the author uses is that instead of Martin Luther King Jr’s speech being read to the class students now watch the same speech. Whilst this type of technological application in the classroom is useful, especially with catering for multiple intelligences and learning styles essentially the learning experiences remain the same.

The last type of technological application is the creation of new and different learning experiences. Utecht explains this type as students learning things they never would have been able to before. Learning off individuals they wouldn’t have had access to pre-technology and sharing their knowledge with the wider world instead of being confined to their classroom, school and community.

The above have been developed to be non-specific and usable by technologically stunted and illiterate and designed to create an awareness to how technology is being used. Utecht finalises his article stating that using technology in each of the before mentioned ways is completely acceptable but if only one type is being used than a teacher should reflect on their technological uses.

The development of this activity consumed many hours locating resources, embedding resources, making the activity aesthetically appealing and working out the technical glitches problematic to using technology (i.e. images disappearing, videos appearing in the wrong spots). I estimate that in total I spent 8 hours developing a half hour exercise. Time pressures for practicing teachers makes the construction of LAMS activities difficult and highly unviable.

However the learning benefits to students potentially outweigh the immense time sacrifice. Students are able to complete activities at their own pace and  are able to benefit from the implementation of activities designed for different learning styles. Allowing students the freedom to explore and express their ideas and understanding in different ways allows deeper understanding of the topic. Having student responses stored online also allows the teacher to easily collect them and gain insight into student’s understanding and plan future learning activities accordingly.

So the question remains. Do the benefits of online tasks outweigh the time and resources required to design and program it? Can teachers find the time needed in their already time-pressured lives to fully utilise the different tools available?

Time will tell.