“Constructivism and Instructional Design” in Critical Dialogue with Moderate and Radical Constructivist Learning Theory

The chapter begins by comparing the positivistic impetus in Merrill’s view of scientific research to the more probabilistic (postpositivist) frame of refence in Karl Popper’s[aut]Popper, K. interpretation of scientific inquiry. In opening educational research to a broader frame of reference based on his evolutionary view of “objective knowledgeObjective knowledge/objectivist,” Popper freely draws on “hard data” and qualitative sources of information as relevant to the investigation at hand, which Merrill views in sharply contrasting terms. The discussion then shifts to the primary focus of this[aut]Duffy, T.M. chapter through an extended review of Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A ConversationConstructivism and the Technology of InstructionA Conversation (Duffy & Jonassen, in Constructivism and the technology of design: a conversation. Lawrence Erlbaum) sifted through the prism of[aut]Merrill, M.D. Merrill’s (Merrill, Duffy and Jonassen (eds), Constructivism and the technology of design: A conversation, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992) key essay, “Constructivism and Instructional DesignConstructivism and Instructional Design.” Merrill posits an implacable contrast between “extreme” and “moderate” forms of constructivism, by adamantly opposing the former, while seeking areas of engagement with the latter, as potentially compatible with ID2 research traditions. Merrill’s position, in turn, evokes varied responses from interlocutors across the ideological terrain, from extremely hostile to those more empathetic to his project. A critical issue underlying the discussion is the extent of Merrill’s instructional range in meeting a broad diversity of learning goals in contemporary educationalReclaiming Instructional Design, vocational, and community-based contexts.