Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Linking radical constructivism and semiotics to design a constructivist learning environment

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

RADICAL CONSTRUCTIVISTS BELIEVE that knowledge is not disembodied but intimately related to the action and experience of the learner. It is always contextual and never separated from the knower. There is no objective reality that is independent of human mental activity. Radical constructivism shares many philosophical perspectives with the semiotic model of Stamper (1993). Semiotics claims that knowledge of the world is mediated through signs. A radical subjective synthesis of semiotics and radical constructivism leads to two axioms: There is no known reality without an agent, and the agent constructs reality through his action. This paper begins with a brief review of the philosophies of radical constructivism and semiotics, followed by a discussion of the implications of semiotics for radical constructivist learning. It concludes with the design of a constructivist learning environment using the semiotic perspective as manifested by Stamper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, D. (1987). Outline of an education semiotic.The American Journal of Semiotics, 5, 201–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, D.J. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic.Educational Psychology Review, 4(2), 165–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J.J. (1968).The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honebein, P. C., Duffy, T., & Fishman B. (1993). Constructivism and the design of learning environments: Context and authentic activities forlearning. In T.M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D. Jonassen (Eds.),Designing environments for constructivist learning (pp. 87–108). NY: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houser, H. (1987). Toward a Peircean semiotic theory of learning.The American Journal of Semiotics, 5, 251–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?ETR&D, 39(3), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebrow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five principles toward a new mindset.ETR&D, 41(3), 4–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (1690/1959).Essay concerning human understanding. NY: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nauta, D. (1993). Information technology and future society as conceived by Peircean Pragmatism. Symposium on The Automated Society, Twente University,Enschede, 16, 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C.S. (1960).Collected Papers of C.S. Peirce, 1931–1935, edited by Hartshorne, C., & Weiss, P. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. (1994).Turtles, termites and traffic jams. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T. (1994). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework.Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shank, G, Ross, J.M., Covalt, W., Terry, S., & Weiss, E. (1994). Improving creative thinking using instructional technology: Computer-aided abductive reasoning.Educational Technology, 34(9), 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamper, R.K. (1985). Knowledge as action: A logic of social norms and individual affordances. In G.N. Gilbert & C. Heath (Eds.),Social Action and Artificial Intelligence (pp. 172–191). Aldershot: Grower Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamper, R.K., K. Althaus & J. Backhouse (1988). MEASUR: Method for eliciting, analyzing and specifying user requirements. In T.W. Olle, A.A. Verrijn-Stuart, & L. Bhabuts (Eds.),Computerized assistance during the information systems life cycle (pp. 67–116). North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamper, R.K. (April, 1993). Sign, norms and information systems. Invited paper, ICL/University of Newcastle Seminar on Information. Newcastle: England.

  • Stamper, R., & Liu, K. (1993). Generating information systems as a by-product of the legislative process, Proceedings Towards A Global Expert System In Law,25th Anniversary Conference of the Institute per la, Documentation. Giuridica. Florence: Italy.

  • Von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching.Synthese, 80, 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, G.H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics.Learning Science and Education, 75 (1), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Lorna Uden

    Present address: School of Computing, Staffordshire University, UK

  2. Gary Shank

    Present address: School of Education, Duquesne University, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing, Staffordshire University, UK

    Kecheng Liu

Authors
  1. Lorna Uden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kecheng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gary Shank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Lorna Uden is a Senior Lecturer in computing science at the School of Computing, Staffordshire University, UK. Her interests include technology in learning, constructivism, problem-based learning, software engineering, human-computer interaction, object oriented design, multimedia, internet learning, CSCW and activity theory. Dr. Uden has been researching in the areas of educational technology and object-oriented design methods. She has published over 20 journal and conference papers on these topics and has developed a Courseware Methodology for technology-based learning.

Kecheng Liu is a Professor at the School of Computing where he holds a chair, Staffordshire University, UK. He has published fifty papers in conferences and journals, such asInternational Journal of Information Management, Journal of Behaviour andInformation Technology. His research interests span from requirements studies, systems analysis and design, object methods for systems engineering, normative modelling for software agents, to HCI and CSCW. He is the founder of a post graduate specialist research course of Information Systems with Semiotics. Dr. Liu has received grants from various research councils and has served in a number of national and international conference committees.

Gary Shank is an Associate Professor for the Department of Foundations and Leadership in the School of Education at Duquesne University. He studied semiotics at Indiana University with Donald Cunningham and Thomas Sebeok and is now working on linking qualitative methods and semiotic theory. He has published inTheory and Psychology andContemporary Educational Psychology and has a text on qualitative methods forthcoming from Prentice Hall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Uden, L., Liu, K. & Shank, G. Linking radical constructivism and semiotics to design a constructivist learning environment. J. Comput. High. Educ. 12, 34–51 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02940955

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02940955

Keywords

Search

Navigation