I think that this is where good ID is needed. Considering the needs and backgrounds of the learners would be the best place to start. In myu first message I did note that entry-level learners would benefit from constructivist activities, too, but in a behaviouralist framework. Perhaps it would be best not to polarise the two approaches. Still, it gets me back to the issue of instructional design's role.
Information is one thing, instruction is another.
If one looks at learning as requiring the learner to assimilate new knowledge, skills, and attitudes into existing schemas, then I would suggest that even entry level students need active learning experiences as the core of an instructional design. The content level and sequence would be different as one would need to guide the entry level learner to the next level. I'm a great believer in interaction. The presentation of information is only a small piece of a full design, at least one that is created to be learner-centered with an emphasis on active learning. I'd be interested to learn more about this.