One thing that I'd just like to finish this all off with is a little discussion of models of Instructional Design. Professor Monson talked about the way that you can ask an instructional designer if they use the Dick and Carey model, and a lot will say, "Of course," but they actually don't do it. The main reason for this is that each model has some fairly specific rules. For example, some say that the process must be systematic and you can only revise after your assessment has uncovered a flaw, where others have an intense web and you revise and create every step whenever. So if you follow the first, any revising before the assessment isn't allowed, and with the latter, not revising all along isn't allowed. In the end, there are very few people who actually follow a model.
The most important thing is that the learner, task, and context are analyzed, then an instruction is designed, developed, and implemented based on that analysis, and that instruction is evaluated and revised. As long as those things happen, I don't feel that it makes a huge difference when you revise, or when you begin steps. The only one that I feel needs to be first is the analysis, because skipping ahead could get you stuck on less-effective methods that the analysis would rule out. Other than that, rigidly following a model could remove all personality and weaken the instruction. So, I feel that instructional designers should put their own slant on the model they use, but within reason.
12.12.2007
12.08.2007
Development and Implementation
We talked about in our presentation how the analysis phase made things go much more smoothly and faster. I'd say that was one of the greatest lessons to take from the design and the development phase. Even though out analysis wasn't perfect, it really set the direction for the rest of the project. So development was generally easy, and we were pretty much able to just put together what we'd planned.
I somewhat wish there was something we could do more for implementation. However, with our project, implementation would take at least 9 hours, so it wasn't exactly something we could do in class. Another thing I noticed about our implementation was that our instructor could be considered a content specialist. That makes a huge difference in our implementation in that we were able to really leave a lot more open to the instructor. If we took a random person off the street, we would have scripted out the entire process and still wouldn't be able to have them assess the quality of the final product. However, with our knowledgeable instructor, we gave general guidelines and left the rest up to them. I felt that it was important to strike a balance, because no directions could give us completely different results with every training, and too much direction could lead to resentment on the part of the instructor or at least a desire to not add anything meaningful to the training. So we stayed somewhere in the middle, giving the instructor guidelines, but allowing some individuality. Hopefully, my redundancy made this point clear.
I somewhat wish there was something we could do more for implementation. However, with our project, implementation would take at least 9 hours, so it wasn't exactly something we could do in class. Another thing I noticed about our implementation was that our instructor could be considered a content specialist. That makes a huge difference in our implementation in that we were able to really leave a lot more open to the instructor. If we took a random person off the street, we would have scripted out the entire process and still wouldn't be able to have them assess the quality of the final product. However, with our knowledgeable instructor, we gave general guidelines and left the rest up to them. I felt that it was important to strike a balance, because no directions could give us completely different results with every training, and too much direction could lead to resentment on the part of the instructor or at least a desire to not add anything meaningful to the training. So we stayed somewhere in the middle, giving the instructor guidelines, but allowing some individuality. Hopefully, my redundancy made this point clear.
Assessment
One thing that I wish we'd spent more time on earlier in the process was the assessment. I think it turned out great, but a good amount of that credit goes to our professor. He said that we should consider and checklist and also asked about how feedback was going to be given. We ended up combining the two and letting the assessment guide the instructor in his feedback. Also, thinking about feedback and a checklist made our assessment much more accurate. We had a checklist, but each question had five boxes that you could check, and each box was associated with a descriptive word. With this, the instructor wasn't just saying good or bad, but how good or how bad. Also, the instructor could then let the learner and the management know exactly where that learner was. Sadly, much of this was done in the development phase, when it should have been started in the analysis. However, I feel it falls in line with our analysis and could have been developed it. I'm very pleased with the end result.
Teamwork in ID
Personally, I think this would be one of the hardest aspects of working in the field of ID. Even though it sometimes seemed that it would be the end of the world if we didn't do everything, I'm sure it would be much worse when each designer is a full-time employee and their are jobs and millions of dollars on the line. Here are some of the lessons I learned about teamwork in ID.
First, communication is key. Especially in the situation of our class, communication is very important. For us, there were a few times where we just assumed that someone in the group was going to do a certain task, but it ended up getting done at the last second, with an added bonus of mild panic. A small amount of time and effort in the area of communicating can save you a whole lot of headache. Also, it was very important to communicate our ideas and share our progress with everyone. We did a spectacular job of this in the design phase. We had rough drafts ready in advance, and we emailed them to each other, then reviewed and revised everything. Our project would have been horrible if we each printed out our own sections, then just put them together in class.
Second, compromising helps. For the most part, our group was on the same page at all times. One of the times that we had a disagreement was in assigned out the jobs for a certain phase. We were just able to talk about what resources and experience we each had and the best person was found for each job. It worked out well in the end, but once again, our final product would not look good if we hadn't compromised on responsibilities.
Finally, get it done. It was amazing how much easier my jobs were than I thought they would be. Somehow, I still had to grit my teeth and just get on task. Once I started, some of my responsibilities took less time and less effort than I ever thought they would, but that's also because we had a solid foundation to work from in our analysis.
First, communication is key. Especially in the situation of our class, communication is very important. For us, there were a few times where we just assumed that someone in the group was going to do a certain task, but it ended up getting done at the last second, with an added bonus of mild panic. A small amount of time and effort in the area of communicating can save you a whole lot of headache. Also, it was very important to communicate our ideas and share our progress with everyone. We did a spectacular job of this in the design phase. We had rough drafts ready in advance, and we emailed them to each other, then reviewed and revised everything. Our project would have been horrible if we each printed out our own sections, then just put them together in class.
Second, compromising helps. For the most part, our group was on the same page at all times. One of the times that we had a disagreement was in assigned out the jobs for a certain phase. We were just able to talk about what resources and experience we each had and the best person was found for each job. It worked out well in the end, but once again, our final product would not look good if we hadn't compromised on responsibilities.
Finally, get it done. It was amazing how much easier my jobs were than I thought they would be. Somehow, I still had to grit my teeth and just get on task. Once I started, some of my responsibilities took less time and less effort than I ever thought they would, but that's also because we had a solid foundation to work from in our analysis.
Making a Lesson
This semester has really changed how I would design a lesson. We'll talk about it in terms of before and after.
Before, I would sit down and think about what I was supposed to teach, then brainstorm methods that I could use to teach it. I would simply look at it in terms of motivation - how I would keep the attention of the class while feeding them information.
Now, I think I'd spend my time much more efficiently. First, I would look at the different things I could teach and select which ones I would. Then, I would write those down as instructional goals, so that my lesson could stay focused on those. I would break down those goals into subtasks. I would think about the students and their lives, noting things that they might already know, or what they might not know. I would also look at how the information would benefit them, and make sure that they are able to make those connections. Then I would plan the most effective way to share the material. I hope this conveys the slight differences that my experience with instructional design would bring. Mostly, I feel the greatest change would come because of analysis; instead of simply deciding what should be taught and what would hold attention, I would break down the skills or knowledge and think more about the current knowledge that my students have.
Before, I would sit down and think about what I was supposed to teach, then brainstorm methods that I could use to teach it. I would simply look at it in terms of motivation - how I would keep the attention of the class while feeding them information.
Now, I think I'd spend my time much more efficiently. First, I would look at the different things I could teach and select which ones I would. Then, I would write those down as instructional goals, so that my lesson could stay focused on those. I would break down those goals into subtasks. I would think about the students and their lives, noting things that they might already know, or what they might not know. I would also look at how the information would benefit them, and make sure that they are able to make those connections. Then I would plan the most effective way to share the material. I hope this conveys the slight differences that my experience with instructional design would bring. Mostly, I feel the greatest change would come because of analysis; instead of simply deciding what should be taught and what would hold attention, I would break down the skills or knowledge and think more about the current knowledge that my students have.
12.06.2007
The Media Debate
The online debate that we had about the effectiveness of different types of media was very educational. Clark strongly attacks the methodology of the research projects that find that a certain type of media is better than another. It reminded me a little of a theorist I learned about in Personality Theories. I can't remember his name, but he basically said that the vast majority of studies in Social and Behavioral Sciences are horribly done and contribute little to the field.
I've found this to be the case of a whole lot of research at the University of Utah. While some call Social science a "soft science", because it deals with so much subjective information, the studies are poorly designed. I think the biggest problem is participants. Nearly every social science study that I've ever seen or heard of at the University of Utah simply uses students who are participating in order to fulfill a course requirement. So you move from a randomly selected group, to adults in college who are taking a course in a social science. Then, they often don't have an independent variable to test and the findings are just descriptive or correlative. While I know that this would make the experiments far more expensive and complicated, they would at least add to the science.
These, and more issues, have disrupted studies looking at which media is more effective. First, the studies often used different instructors who have different styles, and much more time tends to be spent preparing the instruction in the media that is being investigated and not on the media that it is being compared to. In other words, you get a piece of garbage lecture versus a fully developed video.
The message to take away from all of this. Some media might be better than others, but it's not as clear-cut as some would like to say. Also, when discussing research results, it is very important to closely examine the methodology, and don't just accept their results as irrefutable facts.
I've found this to be the case of a whole lot of research at the University of Utah. While some call Social science a "soft science", because it deals with so much subjective information, the studies are poorly designed. I think the biggest problem is participants. Nearly every social science study that I've ever seen or heard of at the University of Utah simply uses students who are participating in order to fulfill a course requirement. So you move from a randomly selected group, to adults in college who are taking a course in a social science. Then, they often don't have an independent variable to test and the findings are just descriptive or correlative. While I know that this would make the experiments far more expensive and complicated, they would at least add to the science.
These, and more issues, have disrupted studies looking at which media is more effective. First, the studies often used different instructors who have different styles, and much more time tends to be spent preparing the instruction in the media that is being investigated and not on the media that it is being compared to. In other words, you get a piece of garbage lecture versus a fully developed video.
The message to take away from all of this. Some media might be better than others, but it's not as clear-cut as some would like to say. Also, when discussing research results, it is very important to closely examine the methodology, and don't just accept their results as irrefutable facts.
12.05.2007
The Projects
One thing that I felt was reinforced most was the importance of having a problem that needs solving. It seemed that almost everyone went through the process of deciding whether they filled a need, or their instruction was redundant.
There was something else that I found interesting. From my point of view, many of the groups jumped all over in the steps. While it's a good thing to revise your instruction, I think it is a bad thing to revise your instruction after the analysis phase because you already had a rough draft of your instruction. I do think that analysis should always be first, because designing a rough draft could lead you to ignore some of your analysis if it goes against what you already created. I think we mostly knew that we wanted to have a job aid, so we did select a media early, but we've learned that job aids are good for psychomotor instruction.
Finally, I would say that the next thing I learned tonight is: time. It takes a whole lot of time to go through this process, and I can only imagine what it would be like to do this full time and have millions of dollars at stake.
There was something else that I found interesting. From my point of view, many of the groups jumped all over in the steps. While it's a good thing to revise your instruction, I think it is a bad thing to revise your instruction after the analysis phase because you already had a rough draft of your instruction. I do think that analysis should always be first, because designing a rough draft could lead you to ignore some of your analysis if it goes against what you already created. I think we mostly knew that we wanted to have a job aid, so we did select a media early, but we've learned that job aids are good for psychomotor instruction.
Finally, I would say that the next thing I learned tonight is: time. It takes a whole lot of time to go through this process, and I can only imagine what it would be like to do this full time and have millions of dollars at stake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)