Thursday, November 4, 2010

I was intrigued by the Kozma/Clark debate. Cognitive questions versus mediated solutions... My position (assigned) ended up being my position. I think learning is absolutely influenced, perhaps for both good and bad, by mediated information. How can your synapses not be burned by vivid 3-D color images of a war, or landscape? Those images will in some way affect the learning process in which they might be incorporated. It seems summed up that media can faciliate learning in different ways for different learners, but increases the options the brain has to encompass and internalize new information.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

The Age Old Battle

In Gentry (1995) the author attempts to differentiate between education, instruction, training and educational technology, instructional technology, etc. I think the name is not so important as what the learner can do at the end of the learning, er, I mean instruction, no - education!  It does appear that the framework for much of what we do today involves technology. And since, ...bevavioral science is to technology as physical sciences are to enginering," the theories, the processes and systems are what is important to the designer "...all human actvities apply the findings of behavioral research to the probem of instuction."(Finn)

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Instructional Systems Design

Re Instructional Design Systems - Five View of the Field (Shiffman) it seams to me that each model builds on the previous. The Media View focuses on media selection, which need to be done and then the Embyonic View on media production, a natural progression. At some point the content becomes important and does so in the Narrow Systems View where sequencing of content is paramount. Needs assessment and evaluation are left out of the three previous, but emerge in the Standard Systems View which represents generally current ISD theory.  Has the development of ID been that linear?  Perhaps these "views" were the dissertation of a doctoral student and then became the "theory."  Regardless, it is interesting to see the components of instructional design segmented in multiple ways and I think leads to better crtiical thinking when the realities of a design problem are presented.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Backward Design

If we reflect on students as clients where all the work of curriculum and instructional design results in the client achieving their desired learning, then beginning with that outcome makes sense. Just as any type of designer has to visualize the end product in the context of the client, good instructional design leads to the goals through thoughtful purpose, activities and achievement.

In other words, the lessons taught are inferred from the results sought and derived backwards.  Not withstanding the discussion about "understanding" in our class, it is understanding that is the focus of good design rather than information.  A content-focus asks "what shall we teach?" rather than "what needs to be learned and why?"  The "twin sins" of  activities as learning and coverage - both miss the mindful engagement related to desired performance. The lessons simply may not meet the goals.

Designers start with the priority learnings (the goals), how achievement will be measured and what it looks like to achieve the goals.  The three stages of this backward design are: 1) Identify the desired results, 2) determine the acceptable evidence of achievement, and 3) plan the learning experiences and instruction. Stage 1 examines the content standards and curriculum expectations and clarifies the purpose and then before moving to design, in stage 2, asks the question, what assessment will validate that the learning has taken place?  Stage 3 is now possible - with clear results identified, a designer can select the appropriate knowledge, skills, activities, and teaching methods. 

I found it interesting that over 60 years ago it was recognized that "Educational objectives become the criteria by which materials are selected, content is outlined, intstructional procedures are developed..." (Tyler, 1949) What is presented in the article is a process for successful backward design. I used the template for the ADDIE project and found it to be surprisingly helpful (once I had spent the time moving through it), so I agree that it provides an overall guide and framework.  The design standards were useful for quality control and could be used for peer review or to examine existing curriculum

Reading through the "Backward design in action with Bob James" helped congeal the steps outlined in the article and reinforced that the "intelligent" tools presented really are a guide through a process that is not at all linear or step-by-step, rather is iterative and back and forth, but results in a product that facilitates effective learning.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Instructional Goals

This chapter focues on the elements of Analysis and various steps or methods used dependent on the the identified need. Performance analysis, a description of the problems to solve and suggested solutions may or may not reveal the need for training. If training is indicated, a needs assessment identifies the goal, actual state and thus the gap between the two.  Kaufman (1998) frames it as a "means to an end."  In the work world, what is more often used is a job analysis (DACUM, job profile) to describe what people do in their jobs. This requires organizing tasks into duties and involves a process of screening, revision and validation.  The goal must also be clarified to identify the learners, context in which they will use the skill and the tools available for the training.

I liked that there is a criteria to frame the analysis question: Will it solve the problem that led to the need, are the goals acceptable to those who must approve the training and are there sufficient resources to complete the goal through insturction?

Honing and clarifying the goal is illustrated in the customer service and writing sentences scenarios which leads nicely to the reading, Understanding by Design, Chapter 1, Wiggins. Wiggins views students as clients whose goal is a desired learning. He compares design to software - it enhances the learners ability to efficiently learn a concept or skill; it fascilitate effective learning. It is "Backward Design" in that the lessons are inferred from the results sought. Understanding is the focus rather than the inputs needed to implement the design. He compares it to results focused design versus content focused design.  The quetion to ask is why this training or curriculum or "so what?" 

Wiggins compares the "twin sins" -  activities and coverage as learning.  Rather, teachers must be able to ask, "What will students be able to do.?"  "What will student's understand?" and "How should the curriculum be shaped to accomplish the goal?" Design should identify the methods to answer these questions.

First framing the goal (s) is critical so that achievment can be measured.  The stages of design then are, (1) Identify the desired results, (2) Determine the acceptable evidence that the goal has been achieved, (3) Plan the learning experiences and instruction. The template provided by Wiggins follows this process and helps guide the designer to use design standards, using quality control to regularly review the curriculum and a set of tools:  Template, Dssign Standards and Design Tools.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

What is technology?

Technology has become a cliche, and then you add "instructional" and most people look a little blank when you tell them this is your field. So let's tear it apart, and start with instructional design, as did Smith and Ragan (1993), but maybe the short version?

Instruction: facilitating learning;  design: intentional planning. So an elevator speech might be "I translate learning into an instructional plan."  When you add technology, defined as tools, machines or techniques used to solve a common problem, you might say, "I apply tools, machines and techniques to enhance instructional plans that result in learning."

I liked the model outined in Introduction to Instructional Design, (Smith & Ragan, 1993). I know from personal experience in working with instructional designers, that process is not always linear, it is works to create the final product: learning.