I guess the one thing I'm confused about as far as instructional design goes and the project I have chosen to do is the front end analysis. I am confused as to what all it should entail.
I guess the material that I strongly related too was in Chapter 10 dealing with Learning Environments and producing instructional activities. I know we would all like our classrooms to be an open-ended environment where the students drive the instruction and the teacher is just the guide, but in education today what seems to drive the learning is the assessments. I view my instructional philsophy as one that is both directed learning and at times open ended. I guess I feel uncomfortable with an open ended environment. I guess I'm a bit of a control freak and like to conduct a more directed learning environment where I decide which way the instruction will go to meet the end goals. The Library/Media curriculum will be changing next year and so I will have to rethink how I will develop my lessons. WE are going to have certain goals that we will have to cover before the end of the school year and use assessments to track the students learning. I think for my subject content area this will kinda be sad. I think our main purpose as Library/MEdia specialists especially at the primary level is to teach our students basic library skills and instill in them a love of reading and a thirst for knowledge. I think it will take the edge that the Library/Media specialist had over the classroom teacher in that they didn't have the same pressures with us that they had in the classroom and this change to our program will make the children feel that we are becoming more and more like their classroom. Some of our magic and mystic will be gone.
I can.t remember what I posted on the first blog. I guess my philosophy leans still more toward the directed learning environment, but striving to become more open-ended. I have learned through the course of the reading we have done what points I need to look at when I'm designing a lesson or unit and how to more deeply dig into learning the target audience and trying to design instruction that will catch their attention, tap into previous experiences, and to have opportunities to keep the students more engaged in the learning process.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Learning Journal Blog Post #3
I find that I’m hesitant in choosing the “perfect” needs/task analysis. I wonder how an ID professional feels confident that they’ve chosen the correct analysis. Although the different tools are all very similar, they each help you find something different. I understand that you can pick and choose segments from each, but it seems you’d do that for every assignment. My question is: Do ID professionals categorize the different approaches to make it easier for themselves? Basically, I wonder if they combine different approaches for one broad topic, like education, and use that tool only.
During the development of my project, I found myself second guessing the approaches I chose. Because of time constraints though, I had to choose what I thought “fit” and would give me the answers I need.
As a special education teacher, I found myself connecting to chapter 11. When writing IEPs, you must be data driven. The student’s Present Levels of Performance is the heart of the IEP. Without appropriate data, the IEP will not effectively reflect the student’s abilities and needs. Additionally, it’s important to know the best way to evaluate students. The information following the subtitle, A Change in Skill, on page 220, is very appropriate to assess a student’s skill when documenting progress quarterly.
Well, reading back on my first journal log showed me how little I understood the differences in philosophies. I can say with 100% certainty that my instructional philosophy is constructivism. To me, knowledge is about experiences, and learning is easier when you can connect the new material to previous experiences. My teaching style reflects this as well. Throughout my lessons I’m constantly revealing to the students how the new material connects to material that was covered in the past or even to my own personal experiences. This may also provide the students with a picture in their minds that reinforces the connection of the material.
During the development of my project, I found myself second guessing the approaches I chose. Because of time constraints though, I had to choose what I thought “fit” and would give me the answers I need.
As a special education teacher, I found myself connecting to chapter 11. When writing IEPs, you must be data driven. The student’s Present Levels of Performance is the heart of the IEP. Without appropriate data, the IEP will not effectively reflect the student’s abilities and needs. Additionally, it’s important to know the best way to evaluate students. The information following the subtitle, A Change in Skill, on page 220, is very appropriate to assess a student’s skill when documenting progress quarterly.
Well, reading back on my first journal log showed me how little I understood the differences in philosophies. I can say with 100% certainty that my instructional philosophy is constructivism. To me, knowledge is about experiences, and learning is easier when you can connect the new material to previous experiences. My teaching style reflects this as well. Throughout my lessons I’m constantly revealing to the students how the new material connects to material that was covered in the past or even to my own personal experiences. This may also provide the students with a picture in their minds that reinforces the connection of the material.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Laura Peet-blog 3
This process of instructional design is long and complicated. Although I have no real questions about the process, I do have questions about if it is really worth it. Do these experts really know what they are talking about? It may sound odd but I will need to see an end product and reflect upon that to put any stock in this process. What I really want to know is is it a better way to do this than what I originally thought? I just wonder if all these pieces are necessary and hwo effective it is. I believe my questions and doubts will be answered when I complete my project.
The one thing that I do like about the process is the learner analysis. I think that it is a wonderful tool and it is very helpful. In the classroom is it challenging to try to get good data on the students, but when you do is well worth it. Knowing what they know and have trouble with is very helpful when planning a lesson. Also, knowing how they feel about it can also be useful. This learner analysis decreases the element of surprise about your students. It is not perfect but gives you somewhere to start, a little ahead of the game.
Overall the instructional design process is what I thought it was going to be. The only thing that may have changed from my original thoughts is that I was clueless as to the many parts of it. The complexity of the process was very surprising to me. I should have known though because planning a lesson in teaching is very complex, but the more you do it the easier it becomes. Some things start to come more naturally than before. I imagine that it will be the same for instructional design. The goal is clear but the parts are still a bit fuzzy. When used more, they too will start to become more clear.
The one thing that I do like about the process is the learner analysis. I think that it is a wonderful tool and it is very helpful. In the classroom is it challenging to try to get good data on the students, but when you do is well worth it. Knowing what they know and have trouble with is very helpful when planning a lesson. Also, knowing how they feel about it can also be useful. This learner analysis decreases the element of surprise about your students. It is not perfect but gives you somewhere to start, a little ahead of the game.
Overall the instructional design process is what I thought it was going to be. The only thing that may have changed from my original thoughts is that I was clueless as to the many parts of it. The complexity of the process was very surprising to me. I should have known though because planning a lesson in teaching is very complex, but the more you do it the easier it becomes. Some things start to come more naturally than before. I imagine that it will be the same for instructional design. The goal is clear but the parts are still a bit fuzzy. When used more, they too will start to become more clear.
Holliday Blog #3
I think I have had more confusion than questions so far as I have progressed through my project. Many of the theories seem like they discuss the same exact thing…so I have a hard time sometimes differentiating between them throughout different steps of the design process. For example, right now, I am trying to get a better grasp on the formative/summative assessment of design (in particular, formative). Because I am still fairly new to my company, I usually have a lot of questions when I go through the design process. I am constantly double-checking with my co-workers, superiors, etc…to make sure the work I am doing is both accurate and effective. But the assessment has always been so informal, and now it’s difficult to imagine it as a formal part of the process.
I’ve tried to read more about formative assessment through various online resources, but they have confused me even more. A lot of the information I am reading online discusses formative assessment and how to utilize it in the classroom. These articles give examples like “letting students grade their own homework” as a formative assessment tool. It just seems like the instructional designer is evaluating the students more than he is evaluating the instruction in some of these scenarios. The way that I understood formative assessment in the book was that it is performed throughout the design process to make sure the educational objectives are being met. Basically, you don’t want to spend 3-4 weeks developing a course, and then have your manager tell you the course doesn’t quite meet the same purpose that he/she had envisioned. From what I have read in the book, formative assessment allows you to evaluate your work throughout the entire design process so that you don’t have to start all over when your original product is rejected. I think that as I read more and more case studies, I will begin to recognize the different strategies for implementing formative assessment. I can then draw some ideas from those scenarios and apply them to my design process.
In the most recent chapters that we read, I really took an interest to Mager’s theory/approach to goal-setting and reaching objectives. At work, we have a review process called the “Performance Partnership Process” (PPP) that we complete 2 times per year. We basically sit down with our manager, develop a list of goals that we wish to meet over the next few quarters, and then assign each goal a percentage based on their importance/significance. We then meet with our managers regularly throughout the quarter to review our progress in meeting those goals. Even though Mager is referring more to the subject of “learning” objectives, I was still able to correlate how this process of goal setting can be applied to my corporate training environment. My manager is basically telling me the action that I need to perform in order to meet each goal, the tools and resources that I will have access to in order to meet each goal, and together we set the criterion that will determine how successful my end results are. I have found that this process is very successful because I know exactly what is expected of me in order to meet my objectives. There’s no surprises at the end of the year when it comes time to review my performance and talk about PROMOTIONS!
Also, on page 179, the text discusses a pitfall of teaching that I have learned from experience. The authors warn not to design instruction based around activities that you remember using when you were a student. It says that people often teach as they were taught because it supports their preferred learning style. Unfortunately, when I did my teaching internship in college, I went through this painful experience. I became accustomed to the lecture-style instruction of college professors and I actually grew very comfortable with listening closely and taking very good notes. When it came time to teach an 8th grade history class, I learned that this strategy doesn’t work with everyone. My initial classes were horrendous. I actually felt sorry for the students because they had to listen to me lecture. I was literally boring myself. Although I knew I had to incorporate some sort of fun activities into the class, I just didn’t feel comfortable doing it. I was too accustomed to the way I was teaching, and all the little games and activities felt too cheesy. But once I stepped outside the box and began incorporating some interactive events to the instruction, the internship got a lot easier. The class responded well, and I didn’t have to worry every night about how the class would respond to my lectures. I felt confident that I was using a diverse set of tools to meet the learning needs of all of my students, and I definitely noticed improvement not only in the learning environment…but in my students’ performance on tests and quizzes as well.
I don’t think my instructional philosophy has changed over the course of this class. I just think I have a better understanding of how to apply my philosophy more effectively. Although I originally thought my philosophies drew from a pragmatics line of thinking, I quickly realized I am actually more in line with the constructivist principles (after some helpful feedback on my original blog post). I still try to make my classes as meaningful as possible to the participants. I want them to find a purpose for attending training, and I want to engage them in topics/issues covered in class. I understand that each of them has a unique learning style, and so far, this class has taught me the steps that I need to follow in order to make sure I am effectively reaching each learner. Before the class, I didn’t have a formal process of designing instruction and evaluating its effectiveness. Now I have a better understanding of not only why I need to diligently design my instruction…but I have the tools, resources, and theories to guide me through its creation. So like I said, although my instructional philosophies still revolve around making the content meaningful to the learner, I now understand why I need to examine the design process, and how to incorporate other philosophies to meet my training objectives.
I’ve tried to read more about formative assessment through various online resources, but they have confused me even more. A lot of the information I am reading online discusses formative assessment and how to utilize it in the classroom. These articles give examples like “letting students grade their own homework” as a formative assessment tool. It just seems like the instructional designer is evaluating the students more than he is evaluating the instruction in some of these scenarios. The way that I understood formative assessment in the book was that it is performed throughout the design process to make sure the educational objectives are being met. Basically, you don’t want to spend 3-4 weeks developing a course, and then have your manager tell you the course doesn’t quite meet the same purpose that he/she had envisioned. From what I have read in the book, formative assessment allows you to evaluate your work throughout the entire design process so that you don’t have to start all over when your original product is rejected. I think that as I read more and more case studies, I will begin to recognize the different strategies for implementing formative assessment. I can then draw some ideas from those scenarios and apply them to my design process.
In the most recent chapters that we read, I really took an interest to Mager’s theory/approach to goal-setting and reaching objectives. At work, we have a review process called the “Performance Partnership Process” (PPP) that we complete 2 times per year. We basically sit down with our manager, develop a list of goals that we wish to meet over the next few quarters, and then assign each goal a percentage based on their importance/significance. We then meet with our managers regularly throughout the quarter to review our progress in meeting those goals. Even though Mager is referring more to the subject of “learning” objectives, I was still able to correlate how this process of goal setting can be applied to my corporate training environment. My manager is basically telling me the action that I need to perform in order to meet each goal, the tools and resources that I will have access to in order to meet each goal, and together we set the criterion that will determine how successful my end results are. I have found that this process is very successful because I know exactly what is expected of me in order to meet my objectives. There’s no surprises at the end of the year when it comes time to review my performance and talk about PROMOTIONS!
Also, on page 179, the text discusses a pitfall of teaching that I have learned from experience. The authors warn not to design instruction based around activities that you remember using when you were a student. It says that people often teach as they were taught because it supports their preferred learning style. Unfortunately, when I did my teaching internship in college, I went through this painful experience. I became accustomed to the lecture-style instruction of college professors and I actually grew very comfortable with listening closely and taking very good notes. When it came time to teach an 8th grade history class, I learned that this strategy doesn’t work with everyone. My initial classes were horrendous. I actually felt sorry for the students because they had to listen to me lecture. I was literally boring myself. Although I knew I had to incorporate some sort of fun activities into the class, I just didn’t feel comfortable doing it. I was too accustomed to the way I was teaching, and all the little games and activities felt too cheesy. But once I stepped outside the box and began incorporating some interactive events to the instruction, the internship got a lot easier. The class responded well, and I didn’t have to worry every night about how the class would respond to my lectures. I felt confident that I was using a diverse set of tools to meet the learning needs of all of my students, and I definitely noticed improvement not only in the learning environment…but in my students’ performance on tests and quizzes as well.
I don’t think my instructional philosophy has changed over the course of this class. I just think I have a better understanding of how to apply my philosophy more effectively. Although I originally thought my philosophies drew from a pragmatics line of thinking, I quickly realized I am actually more in line with the constructivist principles (after some helpful feedback on my original blog post). I still try to make my classes as meaningful as possible to the participants. I want them to find a purpose for attending training, and I want to engage them in topics/issues covered in class. I understand that each of them has a unique learning style, and so far, this class has taught me the steps that I need to follow in order to make sure I am effectively reaching each learner. Before the class, I didn’t have a formal process of designing instruction and evaluating its effectiveness. Now I have a better understanding of not only why I need to diligently design my instruction…but I have the tools, resources, and theories to guide me through its creation. So like I said, although my instructional philosophies still revolve around making the content meaningful to the learner, I now understand why I need to examine the design process, and how to incorporate other philosophies to meet my training objectives.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Neelam - Learning Journal 3
At this stage I understand how to approach almost every stage of the instructional design process; although, I still have questions regarding the formative assessment. I understand that the formative assessment basically plays the role of providing data that should be really collected during early stages of design which can help to improve the instructions. My major question is in understanding how to design the data collection tools for the formative assessments. I went ahead and read online case 3 which gave me some clues but did not satisfy me completely. I am planning to take a look at the formative assessment models in more details and research through some of the databases to better understand the development and implementation of the formative assessment. I think I will also get a better understanding as I implement the instructions for the class project. I think that the formative assessment is a very important piece because it shows how effective the instruction design was.
I think I connected well with most of the material that I read in the last few chapters. I don’t have any direct experiences which I can use to show connection but I have used stages of the ADDIE process while designing engineering and technical solutions. Till now I have not applied this process to instruction design but throughout I saw similarities. It seems to me that processes like ADDIE are universal and have application in many areas.
Thinking back to my first learning journal, I would still prefer an eclectic and practical approach to instructional design. This way there is more flexibility available while designing instructions for various situations. Approaches such as the Just-In-Time-Teaching and universal instructional design would be great asset to an eclectic like me.
I think I connected well with most of the material that I read in the last few chapters. I don’t have any direct experiences which I can use to show connection but I have used stages of the ADDIE process while designing engineering and technical solutions. Till now I have not applied this process to instruction design but throughout I saw similarities. It seems to me that processes like ADDIE are universal and have application in many areas.
Thinking back to my first learning journal, I would still prefer an eclectic and practical approach to instructional design. This way there is more flexibility available while designing instructions for various situations. Approaches such as the Just-In-Time-Teaching and universal instructional design would be great asset to an eclectic like me.
Erin's Blog Post #3
One of the current problems I am facing with the instructional design project is that of formative and summative assessment of the design. I think because I do this on an everyday basis – I am constantly evaluating what I teach and how – and it’s hard to put a method to what I do just by instinct. As I’m working on the project, I know that it will take some rereading of chapter 12 in the text and possibly searching for other resources to help me understand these concepts better. At the same time, however, it was easy for me to connect to the section on learner evaluation. Many of the methods Brown and Green discussed in the chapter are things I have used in my classroom, including objective test questions, essay items, portfolios, and surveys. It depends on the concepts being taught and the method of teaching as to which type of assessment would be the best fit.
With the project, I had some difficulty with the task analysis at first, but once I found a few resources online, and charts, it became easier. I felt as though this section of the book could have used a little more explanation of exactly what you needed to do at each of the steps.
Most of the information in the other chapters (8-10) made a lot of sense to me and was familiar from prior education classes, particularly in my undergrad work. Every day, teachers write objectives on the board to tell the students what they will do that day. My goals usually come from the curriculum, then I break them down and rewrite them into objectives that will make sense to the students. Once I know my goals, I am able to create a sequence for instruction that will help students to meet the goals and choose the delivery method that will meet my students’ needs that day. The delivery method varies by the concepts that will be addressed that day, but can also vary between classes that are working on the same ideas.
In my first learning journal, Dr. Lohnes commented that I may be an “interpretivist” based on my thought that there is frequently no right answer when it comes to discussing a story in language arts. I believe that may be true, but I also think that I am moving more toward the constructivist side of things. I see the value in constructivist teaching and that it also keeps kids more engaged when they can choose activities, or ways to do an activity, to facilitate their own learning. When I teach persuasive essays to the students, this is something many of them want to write about – choice.
With the project, I had some difficulty with the task analysis at first, but once I found a few resources online, and charts, it became easier. I felt as though this section of the book could have used a little more explanation of exactly what you needed to do at each of the steps.
Most of the information in the other chapters (8-10) made a lot of sense to me and was familiar from prior education classes, particularly in my undergrad work. Every day, teachers write objectives on the board to tell the students what they will do that day. My goals usually come from the curriculum, then I break them down and rewrite them into objectives that will make sense to the students. Once I know my goals, I am able to create a sequence for instruction that will help students to meet the goals and choose the delivery method that will meet my students’ needs that day. The delivery method varies by the concepts that will be addressed that day, but can also vary between classes that are working on the same ideas.
In my first learning journal, Dr. Lohnes commented that I may be an “interpretivist” based on my thought that there is frequently no right answer when it comes to discussing a story in language arts. I believe that may be true, but I also think that I am moving more toward the constructivist side of things. I see the value in constructivist teaching and that it also keeps kids more engaged when they can choose activities, or ways to do an activity, to facilitate their own learning. When I teach persuasive essays to the students, this is something many of them want to write about – choice.
Billie's Blog #3
The only question I have at this time is how to do the evaulation piece. I know we discussed this piece of the process in class but I would like a more defined answer as to how we evaluate the IDP we used. Again, do we ask students and colleagues to evaluate our assessment? The only other comment I have to make is I honestly feels that I need to look at everything and absorb the information Before I ask any other questions. I don't feel that I have had the time to do this because of the other required assignments and my professional responsibilities. Is it possible to revisit this question in a week.
Due to the fact that I am a teacher I feel that I am able to make a connection to much of the information provided in chapter's 8,9, and 10. Instructional goals are given to us in the curriculum which helps to create daily objectives for student learning. The objective is then used t create a lesson. The lesson is the scope and sequence of information to meet the objective. For example, student come into the classroom and begin working on the drill which is usually about information already learned or information that is going to be covered in the lesson...what do they already know? Then, some type of engaging activity goes on which is used to motivate the students. After that the "meat" of the lesson is delivered which can happen in a variety of ways, depending on your learners. Finally there is closure, was the objective met. This can be used as an informal evaluation. Each lesson is a sequence of activities to meet the objective.
The learning environment is always considered when teaching students. What type of learning styles are there in the classroom, what is the gender ratio, how many students are there, how long to the instructional time, and what is the range of learning ability. This information is then used to teach an effect lesson.
I don't believe my philosophy about teaching and classrom manage has changed since the start of this class. My ideas on how to manage my classroom is more the behaviorist perspective and I am more of a constructivist when teaching. I do believe every student can learn, we just need to take the time to learn what type of learner each student is.
Due to the fact that I am a teacher I feel that I am able to make a connection to much of the information provided in chapter's 8,9, and 10. Instructional goals are given to us in the curriculum which helps to create daily objectives for student learning. The objective is then used t create a lesson. The lesson is the scope and sequence of information to meet the objective. For example, student come into the classroom and begin working on the drill which is usually about information already learned or information that is going to be covered in the lesson...what do they already know? Then, some type of engaging activity goes on which is used to motivate the students. After that the "meat" of the lesson is delivered which can happen in a variety of ways, depending on your learners. Finally there is closure, was the objective met. This can be used as an informal evaluation. Each lesson is a sequence of activities to meet the objective.
The learning environment is always considered when teaching students. What type of learning styles are there in the classroom, what is the gender ratio, how many students are there, how long to the instructional time, and what is the range of learning ability. This information is then used to teach an effect lesson.
I don't believe my philosophy about teaching and classrom manage has changed since the start of this class. My ideas on how to manage my classroom is more the behaviorist perspective and I am more of a constructivist when teaching. I do believe every student can learn, we just need to take the time to learn what type of learner each student is.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)