Reflection
Introduction
I was an Educational Technologist before I knew what one was. I remember the day I received 3 new computers for my classroom. No software, no instruction, just computers. As the school year progressed, my colleagues and I struggled to find an educational use for our machines. Over the next few years, I became more proficient and confident in the incorporation of computers into my curriculum. I learned to use everything from “drill and kill” to project based software. I not only used what educational software was available to me, I began to create projects for my students to complete that allowed them to learn, and also showcase what they had learned through the computer.
In 2001, Madera Unified School District identified a need for the instruction of teachers in the use of technology in the classroom. A district Educational Technology department was formed, and a director was named. Based on my work with my classroom students over the years, I was asked to apply for one of the four “Teacher on Special Assignment” positions with the Ed Tech department. I was happy to be chosen to become one of Madera Unified’s first “Tech Coaches”.
Old School
In my job as a “Tech Coach”, I became active in classrooms working with K-8 students on computer media-based projects and train teachers on the appropriate use of technology in their classrooms. But all of this was on stand-alone machines and using workstation software and Web 1.0 technologies. But I couldn’t keep up! At the beginning of the 21st century, a new “second generation” of web development and design began to emerge. I believe that the move to the use of the Internet as a platform has fundamentally changed the way I need to look at instructional design.
New School
The opportunity to participate in San Diego State University’s EDTEC program has allowed me to move into the Web 2.0 world. Participation in the program afforded me the opportunity, as a 50 year old, to learn what the Web 2.0 world has become, and how to begin to move my district’s teachers toward the effective use of this world in the education of our students. I have changed. My professional world has changed. In this program, I have been re-familiarized with and introduced to educational theories, principles, concepts, and models. This EDTEC education has changed what I will be doing for and with teachers and students in the future.
My EDTEC Passions
Affection #1 – The ARCS Model
I have now, what I believe to be a solid foundation of models of learning behaviors. E-learning is a new learning model (Kebin, 2001). Understanding the learner’s behavior is the foundation of e-learning.
Keller’s ARCS Model has led me to believe that motivation for learning can be influenced. This is very powerful. I have come to understand that as an instructional designer, I need to take on the responsibility of motivation. I had believed that motivation was the learner’s responsibility, and that my job was simply to provide good quality instruction. Surely, I had no control over a learner’s motivation. Isn’t it the learner’s responsibility to decide whether or not to take advantage of the wonderful learning opportunity I am providing?
I look around today and see so many classroom teachers with that attitude.
Surely, if I really care about the education of my learners, how could I not pay attention to what motivates them.
Had I forgotten how to gain a learner’s attention? I now know how important it is to provide an element of surprise, to stimulate curiosity, to incorporate different methods and media to meet a learner’s needs. I am learning to gain their ATTENTION.
I had come to worry if what I teach is relevant to my learners. I now understand how important matching my motives for teaching to the learners needs. I am aware of how to accommodate different learning styles and needs. I have become more goals orientated, setting purpose to instruction. I am learning to provide RELEVANCE.
Keller reminded me just how important it is for a learner to feel like they had a chance to be successful. I need to provide a challenging and meaningful opportunity for success by informing learners of the expectations and assessments. I now can link learning success to a learner’s effort and ability, acknowledging performance and dedication and hard work. All this to build CONFIDENCE.
And finally, it’s all about SATISFACTION. The learner’s and mine. There could, and should, be some intrinsic enjoyment in the learning experience. I am looking to give and get some positive reinforcement and feedback. The whole issue of equity is addressed as I work to maintain consistent standards and consequences throughout a learning event.
I have a passion for Keller’s ARCS model as an approach for increasing the motivational appeal of my instruction. The model gives me a useful framework for the design and improvement of the quality of my instruction, whether in the classroom or as a small part of Web 2.0.
Affection #2 – Learning Management Systems
I am devoted to the idea of distance learning. Specifically, the participatory culture of a technology that allows for new ways of communicating, collaborating, and circulating new ideas and thoughts. This new technology will allow me ,as an instructional designer, to create my own content, without the barriers of money, time, and expensive equipment. I don’t need to be a computer programmer to create content in an LMS!
The increased availability of the Internet in my classrooms allows for greater access to information by learners. Now, the information to be learned can be outside books, maybe even away from the lecture podium. As knowledge becomes more decentralized, less teacher-driven, the instructional designer can facilitate learning. Using this type of participatory media, the LMS, can be an effective and efficient means of accessing, and making use of that knowledge. The relationship I now have with LMSs is based on a broadening of my mindset and skillset as it relates to this new tool and technology. This system allows for, and maybe even demands, a shift in how I will approach teaching and learning.
Formal K-12 education is defined by the way we use tools for thinking, learning, working, and collaborating. Unfortunately, I was once a teacher that believed that my students were just learners, “all fitting into a mold in which a teacher, ‘tells’ or ‘shows’ unknowing learners something they know nothing about” (Bruner, 1996). EDTEC forced me to challenge my misconception. I have come to appreciate the idea that learning should take place “on demand”. As an instructional designer, through the use of an LMS, I want to enable learners to gain access to relevant information to facilitate learning. Using an LMS effectively,
I can now create and deliver content, monitor learner participation, and assess learner performance. I am excited to be able to deliver content with Web 2.0 features like threaded discussions, video conferencing, and discussion forums.
What I am most fond of is the relationship between LMSs and what businesses believe are the most desirable traits in new employees. An effective LMS must have four important characteristics: presentability, accountability, customizability, and extensibility, or PACE as they are collectively called. Surveys with businesses conclude that the most desirable traits for new hires are effective communication, the ability to work with others, leadership, flexibility, maturity, resourcefulness, inquisitiveness, and the ability to continue learning. Effectively designed content in an LMS supports the development of these traits.
Affection #3 – Learning Theories
To understand learning theory is to have a grasp on the ‘how and why’ students learn. Actual learning is a process that is influenced by cognitive, emotional, and environmental experiences. Polito writes that “learning theories have two important values. On is in providing vocabulary and a conceptual framework for interpreting examples of observable learning (Polito, 2005). The other is learning theory may suggest where to look for solutions to learning problems.” They direct the instructional designer’s attention to the variables that affect the learning process. As an instructional designer, my understanding of the theories under the three major banners of learning theory will affect how I design instruction.
I am a Behaviorist when I think about learning as conditioning. Learning is the acquisition of a new behavior. For me, the contiguity, the consistence, of the process of acquiring a learned behavior is the most important element. As a ID, two things are involved here. First the learning events must be close together in time, forming a bond, and second, reinforcement should be provided to increase the chances that the learned event can be repeated. I see this type of conditioning work every day as I watch students using Math Facts in a Flash. This software is a perfect example of a ‘one size fits all’ learning environment using a behaviorist model to design instruction. Multiple practice sessions, daily, with the stimulus of reward when the correct behaviors are repeated, is a model that does work. However, if the contiguity of the process is compromised, the learning does not take place.
I think like a Cognitivist, when as an ID, I look at learning as processing, building on prior knowledge. I can agree that students learn when they build on what they already know. Here, I think of learning events in terms of cognitive load, the load brought to bear on the working memory of a learner. As an instructional designer and a Cognitivist, I need to be aware of how cognitive load can affect the processing of information. The lack of prior knowledge will lead to a higher cognitive load and therefore, less understanding and learning takes place. The more a student has to learn in a short period of time can also increase cognitive load (Clark, 2006). I see cognitive ‘overload’ every day in classrooms where teachers push out information quickly to meet arbitrary test deadlines.
The biggest part of me is a Constructivist. I am in love with the idea that students can create their own learning through a process of talking, sharing thoughts about activities, tasks, and problems. As an ID, I want to design instruction that promotes the exploration of a new idea or concept by my students. Designing content using a learning content management system seems to me to be the most effective way to promote. Using the wonderful tools introduced to me through the Moodle learning management system, I see myself as a designer looking for ways to use LMSs as a way to facilitate self-directed learning through experimentation and learning by doing.
The Future of These Objects of Affection
Keller’s ARCS Model
Anyone who is interested in a positive systematic change in the way we educate our children needs to understand the ARCS model and its relationship to how are students want to be educated. Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction. Who’s attention do teachers need? Relevent to whom? Building the confidence of ??? Who should feel satisfied? Answer to all these questions……THE LEARNERS !!!!
21st century learning is NOT about transferring information. It is NOT lecturing. It is NOT reading textbooks. It is NOT about answering 80% of twenty True/False questions correctly.
Our students today want to get prepared for a prosperous and fulfilling 21st century future. I believe that all children come to school with an eye toward that goal. After all, it is THEIR future (ATTENTION!). In this century, a young learner’s education revolves around what they see and hear on television, You Tube, the Internet, social networks, and conversations with people whose opinions they respect. They easily and quickly learn things that they see as useful (REVELANCE!). These learners want to work in groups, they want the opportunity to share their ideas with others, to hear and be heard, their ideas listened to and respected (CONFIDENCE!). Lastly, I believe that young learners today want their educations to be, and feel, meaningful and worthwhile. They need to see and feel a connection between what they are learning how it supports their personal goals (SATISFACTION!). If we want to educate a 21st century student, then as Instructional Designers, we had better pay close attention to Keller’s ARCS model as we design course content.
Distance Learning (The LMSs)
Most Learning Management Systems allow the learner and the teacher some control the visual experience in the site. They can change the color and font size and they may have access to some ‘themes’. They are all still mostly standard systems and one looks pretty much like the other in structure.
If Distance Learning and Learning Management Systems are to survive, then the learners of the future will need more LMS choices. The LMS of the future should have a long list of options available to them. We all have different learning styles and preferences. The LMS of the future would allow the learner to choose options based on their learning needs and could be change throughout the process. I like the idea that pretests could be given to allow learners to skip material that they have already mastered. This would then be truly individualized instruction. The LMS of the future would focus on what the learner did not know allowing the learner to focus on new content. The LMS of the future would provide practice and feedback, allowing the learner to have a sense of progress. LMSs would provide for information storage and collaboration. I see that many believe that the LMSs of the future will have to have access to current social networking software. LMS and Facebook? Instructional Designers will need to be concerned about presentation and content in the future.
Learning Theories
Modern learning theory sees learning as an individual quest for meaning and relevance using the tools that are available today. Most, if not all of these tools were not available when Gagne thought about his Nine Events or Keller created his ARCS model. Past learning theories may have failed to address this new reality. The affordances of today’s digital technologies have significantly changed the way students learn. A new theory, social-connectedness and cognitive-connectedness schemata (SCCS) theory, is proposed by Marie Sontag. This theory integrates key elements of past theories with gaming elements in a structure designed to facilitate engagement of students’ social- and cognitive-connectedness schemata. The results of a study using an instructional design model based on SCCS theory showed that students learning in an environment shaped according to these principles developed higher levels of expertise and greater learning transfer. It’s time for Instructional Designers to look backwards and forwards.
References
Bruner, J. (1996) The Culture of Education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., and Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning: Evidence-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Kebin Huang, Feimin Li, Ming Zhao, Feng Wang, Xiaoshuang Xu, “Design and Implement on E-learning Behavior Mine System,”
Polito, Theodora, Educational Theory as Theory of Culture: A Vichian perspective on the educational theories of John Dewey and Kieran Egan Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 37, No. 4, 2005
