This article has enabled a formalisation of my initial model of instructional design...my model did outline a learning centred model which had little or no formal basis, except through experience in the classroom and success in a variety of situations. Not all of the courses I am involved with are structured in this manner, however, as I progress through the paper by Reigeluth, I find a stronger and stronger link to my experience as "... the elaboration theory was developed to provide ... a holistic approach to sequencing"
Types of Sequencing Strategies - Relationships.
I found it useful to have some direction to the topic of sequence and the models offered, summarised below:
Historical: chronological relationship - E.g. Timelines in history
Procedural: order of performance - E.g. Software development cycle
Hierarchical: the various skills and subskills that comprise a task - E.g. Authoring and Multimedia topics
Simplifying conditions: based upon the degree of complexity of different versions of a complex task - E.g. IPT Intro to Information Systems topic and IST - Digital Media (Video editing) unit
I think the spiral sequencing links well to the Simplifying conditions method and this relates well to my initial model of ID.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Comments from Siemens "Learning Development Cycle: Bridging learning Design and Modern Knowledge needs
Here are some quotes and my thoughts on the Siemens Article:
Quote 1:
"Learning design is primarily about creating guideposts, not describing how to walk on a particular path. The best that a well designed course, workshop, or work-integrated learning
resource can offer is the climate in which a learner can choose to learn."
I agree, you cannot force a learner to learn. However, you can create a positive learning environment (positive in the sense that the students will want to learn through intrinsic motivation to learn the content) and you can create a negative learning environement where stduents will learn because they are required to. The latter is a questionable about whether students learn, or just form an ability to reproduce or know or "learn enough to pass the assessment".
Quote 2:
"Designing courses requires set steps and guidelines for instructors and learners to follow. Learning design, in contrast, is concerned with more than simply creating courses. Instead, the intent is to create the constructs within which learning will occur - networks and ecology."
Again, this comment highlights the differences in learning strategies, through identifying the differences between setting courses and designing instruction.
Quote 3:
"Bridging prior learning with academic standards requires...that learners verify stated learning through a variety of sources and means."
Again, linking this back to my initial definition of Instructional design, this fits as I try to verify students learning through multiple real life scenarios and problems.
Quote 4:
" Learner-centred design focuses on giving the learner the ability to decide what he/she feels is important and relevant."
But how can I do this? How do I cater for the student who is not motivated to learn, or not motivated to learn in this particular course?
Quotes 5:
"Research (neuroscience) is beginning to indicate that the primary learning component of our
brains is pattern recognition, not information processing. ...Replacing the causal model of learning (need highlighted, instructional intervention planned, measurement enacted) with “network phenomenon”:" and
"...distributed representation has a profound implication for pedagogy, as it suggests that learning (and teaching, such as it is) is not a process of communication, but rather, a process of immersion.”
This begs the question of assessment, how does one tie this all in? Immersion is fine, but I struggle with assessment of the immersed topic...have I come at it from the wrong (or different) perspective? Is problem based learning a solution to this? In which case, again, my initial definition is still intact!
The following quote again from this article suggests that this is the case:
"...learning can simply be defined as actuated or actionable knowledge. This definition has two components - knowledge: understanding of an implicit or explicit nature, and actuation: doing
something appropriate (defined as contextually aware) with knowledge."
Quote 6:
Not so much a quote, but a response to Siemens' "Learning Domains" of accretion, transmission, aquisition and emergence...
If I have the concept right, one method of implementing this is to set a project or task or set the outcomes, the students can decide how they are going to demonstrate achievement of this outcome and the teacher provides resources for the students to use. Assessment can be through rubrics. Or is this the domain of accretion only? Should we have a broad spectrum of types of instruction to cover all 4 domains?
I love the idea of the learning network/environment/ecology as an ideal, but this is not always possible...the basics must be taught here...(I see a strong link here to Reigeluth's "Elbaoration Theory")
How do I create a learning ecology for the Robotics unit I am designing? Must think more...
Quote 7:
Conclusion:
"Taking a panoramic view of learning, and accounting for unique facets and domains, equips a designer with numerous approaches and methods. Instead of only transmitting learning, educators begin to create structures and networks that will foster a lifetime of learning and learning skills....The monochromatic world of course design is replaced with a vibrant environment where learning occurs in an integrated ecosystem. Learning is a continuous stream, rather than a dammed up reservoir."
Quote 1:
"Learning design is primarily about creating guideposts, not describing how to walk on a particular path. The best that a well designed course, workshop, or work-integrated learning
resource can offer is the climate in which a learner can choose to learn."
I agree, you cannot force a learner to learn. However, you can create a positive learning environment (positive in the sense that the students will want to learn through intrinsic motivation to learn the content) and you can create a negative learning environement where stduents will learn because they are required to. The latter is a questionable about whether students learn, or just form an ability to reproduce or know or "learn enough to pass the assessment".
Quote 2:
"Designing courses requires set steps and guidelines for instructors and learners to follow. Learning design, in contrast, is concerned with more than simply creating courses. Instead, the intent is to create the constructs within which learning will occur - networks and ecology."
Again, this comment highlights the differences in learning strategies, through identifying the differences between setting courses and designing instruction.
Quote 3:
"Bridging prior learning with academic standards requires...that learners verify stated learning through a variety of sources and means."
Again, linking this back to my initial definition of Instructional design, this fits as I try to verify students learning through multiple real life scenarios and problems.
Quote 4:
" Learner-centred design focuses on giving the learner the ability to decide what he/she feels is important and relevant."
But how can I do this? How do I cater for the student who is not motivated to learn, or not motivated to learn in this particular course?
Quotes 5:
"Research (neuroscience) is beginning to indicate that the primary learning component of our
brains is pattern recognition, not information processing. ...Replacing the causal model of learning (need highlighted, instructional intervention planned, measurement enacted) with “network phenomenon”:" and
"...distributed representation has a profound implication for pedagogy, as it suggests that learning (and teaching, such as it is) is not a process of communication, but rather, a process of immersion.”
This begs the question of assessment, how does one tie this all in? Immersion is fine, but I struggle with assessment of the immersed topic...have I come at it from the wrong (or different) perspective? Is problem based learning a solution to this? In which case, again, my initial definition is still intact!
The following quote again from this article suggests that this is the case:
"...learning can simply be defined as actuated or actionable knowledge. This definition has two components - knowledge: understanding of an implicit or explicit nature, and actuation: doing
something appropriate (defined as contextually aware) with knowledge."
Quote 6:
Not so much a quote, but a response to Siemens' "Learning Domains" of accretion, transmission, aquisition and emergence...
If I have the concept right, one method of implementing this is to set a project or task or set the outcomes, the students can decide how they are going to demonstrate achievement of this outcome and the teacher provides resources for the students to use. Assessment can be through rubrics. Or is this the domain of accretion only? Should we have a broad spectrum of types of instruction to cover all 4 domains?
I love the idea of the learning network/environment/ecology as an ideal, but this is not always possible...the basics must be taught here...(I see a strong link here to Reigeluth's "Elbaoration Theory")
How do I create a learning ecology for the Robotics unit I am designing? Must think more...
Quote 7:
Conclusion:
"Taking a panoramic view of learning, and accounting for unique facets and domains, equips a designer with numerous approaches and methods. Instead of only transmitting learning, educators begin to create structures and networks that will foster a lifetime of learning and learning skills....The monochromatic world of course design is replaced with a vibrant environment where learning occurs in an integrated ecosystem. Learning is a continuous stream, rather than a dammed up reservoir."
Reigeluth (1993) ID definition:
In the Siemens article, he quotes Reigeluth's definition of ID as: " A discipline that is concerned with understanding and improving one aspect of education: The process of instruction". And as Siemens goes on to suggest, this is too narrow a field for my liking, despite my appreciation for much of what Reigeluth suggests in other docs.
That said, there can be a major effect on the learning process of the accurate and effective design of the instruction.
That said, there can be a major effect on the learning process of the accurate and effective design of the instruction.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)