Principles, theories, & models artifacts
Understand many theories and models, choose from among them appropriately,
and apply them effectively. |
|
To improve our instructional design skills in the 544 Instructional Design course, I helped develop a PowerPoint training module for teachers with team members, Kat Lund and Peggy Ward. The TechnoVets training module was designed to meet the training needs of middle and high school teachers who were not adept with computers. The module specifically focused on PowerPoint skills.
Our initial analysis revealed that the educational landscape of the classroom was changing at a rapid speed and that veteran teachers are especially vulnerable to being left behind.
Using Robert Mager's advice on instructional objectives (Mager & Pipe 1933) and Ruth Clark's advice on developing technical training (Clarke 1999), we formulated our objectives. You can see my objective contribution on Slide 17 of the Veteran Educator's Use of Technology presentation (link to SS TechnoVets-final.ppt). Although we weren't asked to develop the actual training product, we proposed an interactive CD-Rom.
Our rational for the learning system included the following:
• Teachers are required to meet district standards for PowerPoint use.
• CD ROM will allow teachers to progress through the training at their own pace.
• CD ROM will allow teachers to individualize their instruction.
• Audio and video elements will make instruction more personal.
• Step-by-step demonstrations on demand will ease learner anxiety.
We designed Systems Specifications to include three instructional modules (each preceded by the Instructional Objective to be addressed) with audio and visual support, demonstrations, practice, and feedback. We wanted to take advantage of the Dual Coding theory (Paivio 1986) -link here to http://tip.psychology.org/paivio.html and the Contiguity Principle (Clark & Mayer, 2006) by aligning graphics and text. We also wanted to utilize Merrill's Component Display Theory (CDT) by including his theory of the two dimensions of learning: content (facts, concepts, procedures, and principles) and performance (remembering, using, generalities).
Our learning objectives were primarily procedural and focused on near-transfer skills. However, based on our learning audience (highly educated and adept at self-learning), it was our intention that they would be able to accomplish far-transfer learning and deliver any given content instruction via their newly mastered PowerPoint skills.
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of our intended product, we developed some questions to test the design.
What did I take away from this project? Various theories were involved with this project. I learned the importance of grasping the learner's attention and addressing motivation, which is particularly necessary if there is resistance on the part of the learner (Gagne's Conditions of Learning, Keller's ARC's model, Rossett's CLAM, Malone & Lepper). In addition, offering a flexible and learner-controlled environment (if the learners are ready for this), making training contextually relevant, providing instruction that has built-in mechanisms for error recognition and feedback, and providing a means for message extension are crucial ingredients for successful instructional design (Clark and Mayer 2006).
This project was completed in my 544 Instructional Design class. We were asked to analyze a situation in need of instruction and submit a proposal to a hypothetical corporation.
Like many of our assignments, more than one competency was addressed. In addition to utilizing principles, theories, and models, this project was very process oriented. Following the ADDIE model, I presented an overview of the problem, did analysis of the situation and intended learners to establish the need for training, collected data by reviewing extant data and conducting interviews, developed learning objectives, and came up with a solution system.
I proposed creating a self-study module for the School of Teacher Education (STE) student teacher supervisors. The department had recently endured significant budget cuts that took away the opportunity for supervisor training. In addition, trained supervisors were being laid off. So it was somewhat of a “double whammy” for the department.
A big component of this experience was audience analysis. I interviewed key players which included the Field Experiences Coordinator (the supervisor's liaison); one incoming supervisor; one seasoned supervisor; a new student teacher; and one student teacher who had already gone through the experience. Getting data from an array of perspectives assured me that I come away with the “big picture” needed to create an appropriate training module.
What did this challenge consist of? In terms of the big picture, it seemed to be a people development issue. Was I dealing with skills/knowledge, motivation, incentives, or environmental issues? Faculty were concerned about job security and work loads. They weren't particularly keen on going to public schools to supervise students. Obviously there was a skills/knowledge component, but the learners were highly educated individuals who could easily grasp and retain skills and strategies needed to be effective supervisors. I think the more difficult piece of the puzzle would be motivation.
Although we were not required to go into the design and development phases, this module was to be delivered via CD Rom to allow for a flexible learning schedule. Apparently, there is still some interest in following through with this product. It would be interesting and rewarding to see if it added any value for the department.
