Constructivism has recently gained popularity, although it is not a completely new learning paradigm. Much of the work within e-learning, for example, uses constructivism as a reference “discipline” (explicitly or implicitly). However, some of the work done within the simulation gaming (SG) community discusses what the basic assumptions and implications of constructivism for SG are. Constructivism provides one theoretical approach to the use of computer-based systems and, as such, deserves careful consideration. The author's view is that SG researchers—as SG is a transdisciplinary field—should seek to do research that is acceptable in terms of other disciplines and need to go back to the original texts in the reference discipline to gain genuine appreciation of the arguments being proposed. This is an aim of this article. Another aim of this article is to provide theoretical tools with which to enhance SG argumentation development and debriefing.
Alessi, S. (2000). Designing educational support in system-dynamics-based interactive learning environments. Simulation & Gaming , 31(2), 178-196.
2.
Bednar, A.K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M., & Perry, J.D. (1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 17-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
Boland, R.J., & Tenkasi, R.V. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350-372.
4.
Boyle, T. (1997). Design for multimedia learning. London: Prentice Hall.
5.
Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning . Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
6.
Cheetham, G., & Chivers, G. (2001). How professionals learn in practice: An investigation of informal learning amongst people working in professions. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25(5), 248-292.
7.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University (1992). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 77-89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Duffy, T.M., & Cunningham, D.J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170-198). New York: Macmillan.
9.
Duffy, T.M., & Jonassen, D.H. (1992a). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technology. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 1-16). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Duffy, T.M., & Jonassen, D.H. (1992b). Preface. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Ekpenyong, L.E. (1999). A reformulation of the theory of experiential learning appropriate for instruction in formal business education. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 51(3), 449-471.
12.
Gosenpud, J. (1990). Evaluation of experiential learning. In J. W. Gentry (Ed.), Guide to business gaming and experiential learning (pp. 301-329). London: Nichols/GP.
13.
Gredler, M.E. (1996). Educational games and simulations: A technology in search of a (research) paradigm. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 521-540). New York: Macmillan.
14.
Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise- Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
15.
Herz, B., & Merz, W. (1998). Experiential learning and the effectiveness of economic simulation games. Simulation & Gaming, 29(2), 238-250.
16.
Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Evaluating constructivistic learning. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 137-148). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
Jonassen, D.H., & Land, S. (2002). Preface. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. iii-ix). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K.L., & Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19.
Kayes, D.C. (2002). Experiential learning and its critics: Preserving the role of experience in management learning and education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(2), 137-149.
20.
Keys, B., & Wolfe, J. (1990). The role of management games and simulations in education and research. Journal of Management, 16(2), 307-336.
21.
Klabbers, J.H.G. (1999). Three easy pieces: A taxonomy on gaming. In D. Saunders & J. Severn (Eds.), The international simulation & gaming research yearbook: Vol. 7. Simulations and games for strategy and policy planning (pp. 16-33). London: Kogan Page.
22.
Klabbers, J.H.G. (2001). Bridging information & knowledge society: Potentials of gaming. In L. Rahnu (Ed.), Bridging the information and knowledge societies (pp. 27-64). Tartu , Estonia: Tartu University Press.
23.
Klabbers, J.H.G. (2003). Interactive learning of what? In F. Percival, H. Godfrey, P. Laybourn, & S. Murray (Eds.), The international simulation & gaming yearbook (Vol. 11, pp. 257-266). Edinburgh, UK: Napier University.
24.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Lehtinen, E., & Kuusinen, J. (2001). Kasvatuspsykologia [Educational psychology]. Helsinki, Finland: WSOY.
27.
Marsick, V.J., & Watkins, K.E. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace . London: Routledge.
28.
Merrill, M.D. (1992). Constructivism and instructional design. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 99-114). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Mirvis, P.H. (1996). Historical foundations of organizational learning . Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(1), 13-31.
30.
Paul, R.J., Macredie, R.D., & Thomas, P.J. (1996). Communicating problem understanding through computer-based simulation models. In D. Saunders, F. Percival, & M. Vartiainen (Eds.), The simulation and gaming workbook: Vol. 4. Games and simulations to enhance quality learning. London: Kogan Page.
31.
Saunders, D. (1995). Introducing simulations and games for business . In D. Saunders (Ed.), The simulation and gaming workbook: Vol. 3. Games and simulations for business (pp. 13-20). London: Kogan Page.
32.
Spector, J.M. (2000). System dynamics and interactive learning environments: Lessons learned and implications for the future. Simulation & Gaming, 31(4), 528-535.
33.
Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, 31, 24-33.
