The meaning of effective pedagogical practices refers to how teachers can best use various digital technologies in teaching to create a better learning environment for students. In the early years of this discussion, many researchers explained what teachers were required to know when designing teaching with various technologies. Many researchers in this regard support the constructivist approach as being the best suited pedagogical design for using technologies in teaching. For example, Brooks and Brooks (1999) suggest that interactive learning environments allow learners to become partners in the learning process, which also leads them to become “autonomous thinkers … [where they] internalise and reshape, or transform new information” (pp. 13-15). Similarly, Boshuizen and Wopereis (2003) analysed benchmarks for designing learning with technologies, in which they supported the social constructivist framework.
Explaining more about how this learning should take place, Gallant (2000) argues that teachers must design learning to ensure that students’ active involvement is supported in the learning process. In her analysis of professional development for web-based teaching, she noted the importance of teachers’ facilitation of students’ use of technologies for learning to occur, rather than the transformation of learning through teachers’ use of technologies. Pritchard (2007), in his explanation of teaching with the Internet
technologies, says that the constructivism design of learning allows learners to build their understanding of “events, concepts, and process” based on their own “personal
experiences” through the interaction with others (p. 2).
These researchers’ understanding of designing learning is linked to the social constructivist view of learning, which suggests that understanding, meaning or
interpretation is partly derived from an individual’s interaction with others in the learning context. This idea of how knowledge is constructed is derived from social-cultural theory as proposed by Vygotsky (1978). In this theory, knowledge is actively internalised through conversations or interactions between learners and other individuals who are more knowledgeable. The literature here suggests that students’ interaction is a key element of constructivist learning when designing learning and teaching with digital technologies. It thus links to the idea of using technologies for facilitating learning, in contrast to delivering learning through them. This means that students would be given
44
opportunities for constructing knowledge through their use of technologies, instead of teachers using technologies for delivering knowledge. The former is student-centred, while the latter remains teacher-centred.
More recently, the same idea of constructivist views of teaching with technologies has been explained. For example, Webb (2013) took the two metaphors of learning
“acquisitionism” and “participationism” (p. 1), which were originally proposed by Sfard (1998). The acquisition metaphor basically assumes that the human mind is an empty vessel, which learning can be seen as filling, and which also enables the individual to store the knowledge during the transfer process. This way of learning is more like a mimetic approach to learning, in which students commit to storing information in their brains, and recall this information when performing in an examination. This also has parallels with children’s learning to recite the Qur’an without understanding, as practised in the Maldives (refer Chapter Two). By contrast, the participation metaphor assumes that learning is a process of participation in contexts where individuals are influenced by social interaction (Webb, 2013). The distinction between the two metaphors could be identified in terms of the activities that take place during the pedagogical process. The acquisition metaphor focuses on the product or outcome of the activities (knowledge), whereas the participation metaphor concentrates on the activity and the process itself (knowing). In these two metaphors, the learning scenarios change from passive to more interactive technology-integrated pedagogies. Webb recognises here that the underlying principle is designing student learning through a constructivist approach, where students actively participate in the production of knowledge. Bearing this in mind, my research concerns whether a constructivist approach to learning could be implemented when teachers consider themselves sole experts (teacher-centric) in their views of teaching, such as in Muslim communities as discussed earlier. This leads to a question of how digital technologies would be treated in such pedagogical contexts.
Adams (2011) believes that the constructivist view of learning was not originally
grounded on a of basis understanding, which determines the role of digital technologies in teaching or the role of teachers when using these tools. Judson (2006) argues that
although constructivist learning and technology integration was “long been tagged with the reform label” (p.592), it has not been clear how constructivism and technology integration are entwined. According to Judson (2006), technology is “not a mechanism that enables constructivism, it is a device best used at the moment when it enables students to gain deeper understanding” (Judson, 2006, pp. 592-593). Adams (2011) also claims that constructivism should not be seen as a prescription for technology-integrated pedagogical practice. Both these researchers further assert that teachers often concentrate
45
on their best use of digital technologies, ignoring the effect of their uses on student learning and their approaches of teaching. Given that Judson’s and Adams’s concerns were raised in different periods of time, one in the mid-2000s and other in the 2010s, it raises concerns regarding the reasons that make teachers focus on technology, rather their teaching approaches.
Kirschner and Davis (2003) claim that teachers should avoid treating technology as something special. Rather, it needs to be taken as a common and normal element that they need for teaching. On the other hand, Baker (2012) suggests that technology demands a pedagogical approach which puts the use of technology at the centre of the learning process, rather than as an outcome of learning. The literature discussed above suggests that technology-integrated pedagogical practice ought to be designed in ways that can give students opportunities for constructing knowledge themselves and learning through participation. This runs counter to teacher-centric pedagogies. Along with some
theorisation of effective pedagogies with technologies, some researchers propose models for appropriate use of technologies in teaching.