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.
Tracie - Blog #3
I had to go back and reread my first blog, because honestly, I couldn't remember what I wrote. At the beginning of the course, I was behaviorist in my classroom management, and constructivist in my instruction. I don't think that has changed at all. I am perhaps more aware of why I teach the way I do, or why I build my instruction the way I do, but my underlying reasons and beliefs have not changed.
I still struggle with how to motivate kids/people to learn. Reading through the case studies, I realize how much harder it is to motivate adults who are potentially set in their ways than children who are still somewhat willing to learn. I struggle with the kids who have so much baggage that they just don't care about learning, or have learned that no one at home cares, so why should they. As I worked on my project, I tried to pull ideas and resources that would make it as hands-on and interactive as possible, to try to pull in even these reluctant learners. I think I succeeded to some extent. However, it is frustrating to note that I had to write up three students during one activity for squirting each other with food-colored water during a lab. Not a shining moment, and it did include one of those kids who just doesn't care.
That brings me to my connections to the readings. The first is in Chapter 9 on page 164. The authors state, "The events of instruction should be considered a reciprocal process in which instructors and students make contributions that lead to an effective learning experience." That screams to me the reason why students who are carrying too much baggage from home have difficulty learning. They cannot focus long enough on the task at hand to actively participate and make the contributions that will leat to an effective learning experience because they are so overwhelmed by their home life. So, how do we get them past that so they can achieve success?
I also connected with Mager's Approach (p. 146) to setting goals and objectives. His use of Action, Conditions, and Criterions reminded me of writing/reviewing IEP's for students. They always have a % criterion for the goal to be considered met. As I mentioned in class, I still have an issue with teachers who create a lot of activities, but have no sound basis for them. In Chap. 10, (p. 178), it specifically says that instruction could be designed this way, but the approach would never be recommended. I think teachers should have to justify the activities they are doing in class, and show how they are going to bring students around to learning, not just playing.
Finally, I enjoyed reading the chapter on evaluation. I use most of the test items described, except true/false. I try very hard not to use them, and found it interesting that the first bullet under guidelines is, "use them sparingly, if at all". I like that! The one thing that I do differently is matching. Over the years, I have learned that kids have a really hard time doing matching where the word is on the left, and the matching definition is on the right. Instead, I put the definitions or answers on the left, and have the single word on the right. In this way, students read the longer definition, then find the matching word. My special educators also like this way, as it is easier for sped. students. Also, for sped. kids, I chunk the matching into groups of 4-5 items.
I still struggle with how to motivate kids/people to learn. Reading through the case studies, I realize how much harder it is to motivate adults who are potentially set in their ways than children who are still somewhat willing to learn. I struggle with the kids who have so much baggage that they just don't care about learning, or have learned that no one at home cares, so why should they. As I worked on my project, I tried to pull ideas and resources that would make it as hands-on and interactive as possible, to try to pull in even these reluctant learners. I think I succeeded to some extent. However, it is frustrating to note that I had to write up three students during one activity for squirting each other with food-colored water during a lab. Not a shining moment, and it did include one of those kids who just doesn't care.
That brings me to my connections to the readings. The first is in Chapter 9 on page 164. The authors state, "The events of instruction should be considered a reciprocal process in which instructors and students make contributions that lead to an effective learning experience." That screams to me the reason why students who are carrying too much baggage from home have difficulty learning. They cannot focus long enough on the task at hand to actively participate and make the contributions that will leat to an effective learning experience because they are so overwhelmed by their home life. So, how do we get them past that so they can achieve success?
I also connected with Mager's Approach (p. 146) to setting goals and objectives. His use of Action, Conditions, and Criterions reminded me of writing/reviewing IEP's for students. They always have a % criterion for the goal to be considered met. As I mentioned in class, I still have an issue with teachers who create a lot of activities, but have no sound basis for them. In Chap. 10, (p. 178), it specifically says that instruction could be designed this way, but the approach would never be recommended. I think teachers should have to justify the activities they are doing in class, and show how they are going to bring students around to learning, not just playing.
Finally, I enjoyed reading the chapter on evaluation. I use most of the test items described, except true/false. I try very hard not to use them, and found it interesting that the first bullet under guidelines is, "use them sparingly, if at all". I like that! The one thing that I do differently is matching. Over the years, I have learned that kids have a really hard time doing matching where the word is on the left, and the matching definition is on the right. Instead, I put the definitions or answers on the left, and have the single word on the right. In this way, students read the longer definition, then find the matching word. My special educators also like this way, as it is easier for sped. students. Also, for sped. kids, I chunk the matching into groups of 4-5 items.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Jen's Blog 3
The part of the instructional design process I still have questions about is assessing not my learners but the instructional design process itself. I am think that the two learner assessment and assessing the instructional design are so closely related that it is hard for me to isolate the two. I have yet to complete this section of my project but I think that I have to keep in my mind they are different and look at the two accordingly. I do think that it is easier for me to identify the pitfalls in an isolated lesson opposed to an entire process. As a teacher I am constantly assessing the lesson what I could have done differently, what misconceptions my students still have, and what if any further teaching I may need to develop. This is a formative assessment of each lesson. This however is not a summative assessment of the entire instruction or the big picture. This project and readings has made me realize that this is a down fall of mine. I also thought I was assessing my instruction because I looked so critically at each lesson or sub-skill. I now realize that I need to assess the big picture. I do look at the data and try to bring it back up in quick reviews. I need to dig deep and ask why and think about how to change the big picture like I do for each lesson. The one thing that I really connected with was the learning environments chapter. That chapter was nothing new to me but just reiterated for me the need to match the content to the learning environment. There always a push to try this type of lesson or this type of tools in the classroom. Many of them are great but do not work for everything or every student. I often get pressured in trying to use a lesson model or teaching tool that just does not work. I try it out and it does not work but I have the fear of not using because that is “what you should be doing”. It is not that I am not willing to try but there are some things that are not appropriate for 6 and 7 year olds. That is a great tool for the upper grades. It just really validated to me that changing your learning environment is appropriate and should be done to meet the needs of your learner and the content. My understanding of instructional design has not changed much but rather has deepened. I always considered students’ needs and assessment I just did not do them in the depth that we have looked at. My understanding was very surface level and I feel now I have deeper understanding of the process and how to go about it. I do not think that I could go that in depth for every lesson but it is definitely something to consider when I am developing a unit or mini unit. Also it would valuable when I see a problem in the classroom. The various approaches are a tool for me to use as a problem arises. I would say another change is knowing the name for many of the process. As teacher we do some form of the step every day naturally without even thinking about it.It is important to know the step so that it is not getting skipped. It is also important to know other perspectives and methods to go about. I knew the importance of learner analysis and task analysis but I did not know the different approaches and step to take to conduct them. I was winging it basically. Reading the book and class discussions has helped me further my understanding of these components.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Christine Forrester/Learning Journal Blog # 3
I am having trouble with the task analysis - I think. I did this part of the project incorrectly, and thankfully my peer group (Billie and Erin) set me on the correct path last Thursday evening in class. I re-wrote parts of the task analysis and re-posted it in the group discussion files. I am still not sure I did this right! I am reaching out for help here!! Please give me some insight.
I also do not understand question 8/section 2 of the IDP - Describe the plan for the interface design/production of materials and media. I really need clarification here. I have no clue what this means!
Setting Instructional goals and objectives is the easiest part of teaching for me. Once I have these clarified, which in many cases my curriculum guide does this for me, I can jump right into planning units and individual lessons. Sometimes I get very bogged down in the details of lesson planning. Often, I find that I have trouble deciding what materials to use because I have so much I can choose from. I learned a long time ago that setting goals and objectives and sharing them with students at the start of every lesson is essential to student success and closure of a particular topic. I identify completely with Morrison, Ross, and Kemp's Approach to objective setting. For every lesson I teach I have my students write in their notebook the objective (s). I combine Morrison's, et. al. terminal and enabling objectives when I write them. This way students know from the beginning of a lesson what the expected outcomes will be.
In chapter 9, Creating Instruction, I learned the specific names of the steps of creating instruction. This chapter definitely gave me "food for thought" about the scope and sequence of unit and lesson planning. It emphasized the importance of understanding the organization of materials, events, learning experiences, delivery methods of instruction, and scope and sequence in order for learners of all levels to be reached in an effective instructional manner.
As a teacher, I use both open-ended learning environments and directed learning environments. I started using open-ended learning environments very recently, though, and I am not very comfortable using this type of environment. I am always afraid that the "big ideas" will somehow not get taught, but they always do. So long as I am clear about my expectations for students and in explaining the goals and objectives. I have found that this type of environment works well with long-term assignments and research projects.
The chapter on evaluation was interesting to me. I use many of the evaluation processes that were described in this chapter, including performance assessment. When using technology in a lesson or for a project, some students do not know how to use selected software programs. I have found the doing direct testing along the way and then performance ratings after, have proven to be great sources of hands-on learning for students and confidence builders. Constructed response, short-answer, matching, and selected response are types of questions I often use during a lesson/unit and after a lesson/unit to evaluate how well students are grasping what is being learned in class. True/false test items are not something that I use often. I have found that students get very confused when answering these type of question. When I do use them, it is usually as a preinstruction tool and I always require students to correct the word or phrase that is incorrect in a false statement or question. It has been my experience that students will change and re-write the entire sentence and still get the answer wrong.
My instructional philosophy has not changed. I re-read my first learning journal blog post and I still identify with cognitivism, constructivism, and postmodernism. Mental processes can be identified in many cases and the human mind, hence thinking, is very complex. I totally agree with the constructivist view in that learning and thinking are directly connected to a person’s understanding of the world and their experiences. Postmodernism piggy-backs on this thought, in that a person’s reality is based on their experiences and the realities in their life. This is constantly changing and depends on a person’s interpretation of the world in which they live. The way that students think and learn are directly connected to each other, as well as the philophies discussed above.
I also do not understand question 8/section 2 of the IDP - Describe the plan for the interface design/production of materials and media. I really need clarification here. I have no clue what this means!
Setting Instructional goals and objectives is the easiest part of teaching for me. Once I have these clarified, which in many cases my curriculum guide does this for me, I can jump right into planning units and individual lessons. Sometimes I get very bogged down in the details of lesson planning. Often, I find that I have trouble deciding what materials to use because I have so much I can choose from. I learned a long time ago that setting goals and objectives and sharing them with students at the start of every lesson is essential to student success and closure of a particular topic. I identify completely with Morrison, Ross, and Kemp's Approach to objective setting. For every lesson I teach I have my students write in their notebook the objective (s). I combine Morrison's, et. al. terminal and enabling objectives when I write them. This way students know from the beginning of a lesson what the expected outcomes will be.
In chapter 9, Creating Instruction, I learned the specific names of the steps of creating instruction. This chapter definitely gave me "food for thought" about the scope and sequence of unit and lesson planning. It emphasized the importance of understanding the organization of materials, events, learning experiences, delivery methods of instruction, and scope and sequence in order for learners of all levels to be reached in an effective instructional manner.
As a teacher, I use both open-ended learning environments and directed learning environments. I started using open-ended learning environments very recently, though, and I am not very comfortable using this type of environment. I am always afraid that the "big ideas" will somehow not get taught, but they always do. So long as I am clear about my expectations for students and in explaining the goals and objectives. I have found that this type of environment works well with long-term assignments and research projects.
The chapter on evaluation was interesting to me. I use many of the evaluation processes that were described in this chapter, including performance assessment. When using technology in a lesson or for a project, some students do not know how to use selected software programs. I have found the doing direct testing along the way and then performance ratings after, have proven to be great sources of hands-on learning for students and confidence builders. Constructed response, short-answer, matching, and selected response are types of questions I often use during a lesson/unit and after a lesson/unit to evaluate how well students are grasping what is being learned in class. True/false test items are not something that I use often. I have found that students get very confused when answering these type of question. When I do use them, it is usually as a preinstruction tool and I always require students to correct the word or phrase that is incorrect in a false statement or question. It has been my experience that students will change and re-write the entire sentence and still get the answer wrong.
My instructional philosophy has not changed. I re-read my first learning journal blog post and I still identify with cognitivism, constructivism, and postmodernism. Mental processes can be identified in many cases and the human mind, hence thinking, is very complex. I totally agree with the constructivist view in that learning and thinking are directly connected to a person’s understanding of the world and their experiences. Postmodernism piggy-backs on this thought, in that a person’s reality is based on their experiences and the realities in their life. This is constantly changing and depends on a person’s interpretation of the world in which they live. The way that students think and learn are directly connected to each other, as well as the philophies discussed above.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
How I used needs and task Analysis
Needs analysis
When reading about needs analysis I was thinking about all the different needs that my clients, who are really my students, have. They have so many different needs that change from year to year but, they also have some that remain the same. Each year there are certain areas that the students always need to improve. Is this because of the difficultness of the topic or is it because we have never designed an effective teaching method for that topic?
One specific topic that I conducted an informal needs analysis for is adding rational functions. This topic is important because it is used throughout my class and into their next level math class. Actually, the calculus teachers have asked that we work on this topic because they are finding that their current students struggle with it. If I had to pick a method that I think I was closest to using it would be Rossett’s. I went through a few steps that mirrored that process: 1) How does a student who is good at this know what they are doing? 2) How are my students currently performing on this topic? 3) Are they confident with this topic or clueless? 4) What about it aren’t they understanding? 5) How can I teach it in a way that everyone will be able to do it because there are a few methods that will get the job done?
Myself and another teacher had a discussion based on these questions and developed a few lessons based on our answers. The student’s skills improved but we will see if they really did improve next year.
Task Analysis
Task analysis is a very natural thing for me. Being a math teacher, I always separate topics into the little tasks that make up the big one. Often I start the class off with a drill of what seems like easy math topics. When we finish the drill, I say ‘if you can do that drill, you can do our lesson today.’ I feel it gives them a little confidence boost and provides for a better learning attitude.
The other day, my precalculus class was solving right triangles. To do this they only needed to be able to solve two different types of equations and to be able to use inverse functions to find an angle. So I decided for the begging of the lesson we were going to practice solving those basic types of equations and use inverse functions. They were not given a triangle so they did not know what it would lead to. Later, when they were shown the triangle and asked to solve it, they did it with ease after setting up the appropriate equations. They actually said to me, ‘This is what we did on the drill. It’s easy.’ Good day in my classroom. Although, this task analysis was in my head, the most closely related approach was Smith and Ragan’s. Theirs is a very systematic approach and very to the point. My thoughts and planning resembled that the most.
Billie's Journal #2
Needs analysis, task analysis, and analyzing the learning are processes that are commonly used among educator on a daily basis. However, after reading the assigned chapters it has become apparent that is a more meaningful purpose to each of the components individually. Often an educator's behavior become routine or habit and the tasks we do on a daily basis are just done, forgetting the purpose for each.
Rosette's Five Step Approach seems to be the best approach for for needs analysis within the classroom. The five questions: what does the learner know, how is the learning preforming, what is the attitude of the learner, what is the reasoning for not preforming, and what is the solution are often used when creating daily lesson plans. I constantly try to tap into a learners background knowledge in the classroom through the use of drills, graphic organizers (KWL charts), and asking what do you already know. Pre-assessments also give me some documentation about what a student knows. Mini-assessments (formative evaluation) can be given to track what they know after each experience. Examples of a formative assessment might be: exit ticket, reading/answering questions, or listing.
After reading each of the models used for task analysis I found the best approach for me is the Dick, Carey, and Carey's Instrutional Analysis. First I define a goal. What specifically do I want the learners to gain knowlegde about or accomplish. Then I identify the appropriate steps to get there. For example I might look at the Unit Assessment and determine what I want to to know, then I would teach each of the experiences so that concepts the concepts are introduced to the learner.
Once I am done teaching each experienc then assess the learner. This is similar to a heiarchical approach.
Paying attention to your learners can often times determine if they are engaged. When a learner is not preforming we will discuss these issues at our team meeting. In middle school we teach with a team of teachers which is good for learners at this age. It can be determined by a group of educators that there is a problem. Sometimes this is documented and other times we decide in our classroom what we can do to make the learner successful.
Analyzing learners is continously being done though the first two analysis. Along with needs and task as and educators I also have to factor in the age and maturity of the learners, especially 7th grade. What motivastes them at theis age and do they have an special talent that ccould help them to becaome better learners.
Rosette's Five Step Approach seems to be the best approach for for needs analysis within the classroom. The five questions: what does the learner know, how is the learning preforming, what is the attitude of the learner, what is the reasoning for not preforming, and what is the solution are often used when creating daily lesson plans. I constantly try to tap into a learners background knowledge in the classroom through the use of drills, graphic organizers (KWL charts), and asking what do you already know. Pre-assessments also give me some documentation about what a student knows. Mini-assessments (formative evaluation) can be given to track what they know after each experience. Examples of a formative assessment might be: exit ticket, reading/answering questions, or listing.
After reading each of the models used for task analysis I found the best approach for me is the Dick, Carey, and Carey's Instrutional Analysis. First I define a goal. What specifically do I want the learners to gain knowlegde about or accomplish. Then I identify the appropriate steps to get there. For example I might look at the Unit Assessment and determine what I want to to know, then I would teach each of the experiences so that concepts the concepts are introduced to the learner.
Once I am done teaching each experienc then assess the learner. This is similar to a heiarchical approach.
Paying attention to your learners can often times determine if they are engaged. When a learner is not preforming we will discuss these issues at our team meeting. In middle school we teach with a team of teachers which is good for learners at this age. It can be determined by a group of educators that there is a problem. Sometimes this is documented and other times we decide in our classroom what we can do to make the learner successful.
Analyzing learners is continously being done though the first two analysis. Along with needs and task as and educators I also have to factor in the age and maturity of the learners, especially 7th grade. What motivastes them at theis age and do they have an special talent that ccould help them to becaome better learners.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Learning Blog #2 - Needs and Tasks Analysis
My first teaching experience came roughly 11 years ago at Havre de Grace Middle School. I was a recent hire in the mathematics department and I was asked to teach two periods of 8th grade Physical Science. I agreed because I had always liked science and had taken several science related classes in college but I did not realize that I may be unprepared for teaching Science. I was unprepared for the amount of preparation required nor the curriculum. My problem was how to teach Science given that my training was in mathematics. My needs analysis began with identifying my critical needs; material, resources, curriculum guides, lab procedures and assessment guidelines. I sought the help of highly qualified Science teachers who helped me collect materials for my class and introduced me to available resources. I studied curriculum guides, assessment materials and started completing lab experiments under the watchful eye of the Science department head. At schools end of the first year I was comfortable in the science room and was looking forward to the upcoming year.
Looking back I can see elements of needs analysis and task analysis similar to those we are studying today. Needs analysis was pretty simple, I had to learn how to teach Science. My approach was like Rossett’s Five-Step Approach. I looked for optimal performance. The other 8th grade science teacher was experienced, established and considered one of the best science teachers in the county. I decided to do whatever he wanted me to do. Actual performance was easy. I had no experience teaching science, therefore, my performance was lacking. My feelings were that I knew I could teach science and that I would like teaching it. Identifying causes was another easy step. I knew I lacked some skills, the science lab was unfamiliar territory and I was unsure I could motivate the science students.
Task analysis of my science teaching evolution is much like Jonassen, Hannum and Tessmer’s Approach because it was a ‘process of analyzing and articulating the kind of learning that you expect the learners to know how to perform.’ Tapping into the expertise of my SME, the other 8th grade science teacher, I inventoried tasks that needed to be developed for instruction. After identifying the inventory tasks I broke them down into curriculum areas, assessment areas, laboratory areas and procedural areas. Basically, I described them, prioritized them and sequenced them according to content level and academic level.
I taught 8th grade Physical Science for three years before I was given a schedule of all math classes and I really enjoyed the experience. I could not have done it without the help of Mr. Ray Hebert who I believe was the best science teacher in Harford County. I continue to use my science experience in my math classes by having my students conduct experiments and collect data, then make predictions using math concepts. It was fun.
Looking back I can see elements of needs analysis and task analysis similar to those we are studying today. Needs analysis was pretty simple, I had to learn how to teach Science. My approach was like Rossett’s Five-Step Approach. I looked for optimal performance. The other 8th grade science teacher was experienced, established and considered one of the best science teachers in the county. I decided to do whatever he wanted me to do. Actual performance was easy. I had no experience teaching science, therefore, my performance was lacking. My feelings were that I knew I could teach science and that I would like teaching it. Identifying causes was another easy step. I knew I lacked some skills, the science lab was unfamiliar territory and I was unsure I could motivate the science students.
Task analysis of my science teaching evolution is much like Jonassen, Hannum and Tessmer’s Approach because it was a ‘process of analyzing and articulating the kind of learning that you expect the learners to know how to perform.’ Tapping into the expertise of my SME, the other 8th grade science teacher, I inventoried tasks that needed to be developed for instruction. After identifying the inventory tasks I broke them down into curriculum areas, assessment areas, laboratory areas and procedural areas. Basically, I described them, prioritized them and sequenced them according to content level and academic level.
I taught 8th grade Physical Science for three years before I was given a schedule of all math classes and I really enjoyed the experience. I could not have done it without the help of Mr. Ray Hebert who I believe was the best science teacher in Harford County. I continue to use my science experience in my math classes by having my students conduct experiments and collect data, then make predictions using math concepts. It was fun.
Phil Holliday Journal Entry #2
I recently performed a needs and task analysis when I was creating a training course for one of our commercial banking departments. We are rolling-out a new investment management application in early April, and all of our portfolio managers (PM’s) will be upgraded to a new platform to track and maintain client accounts. In order to decide whether or not training was necessary, we had to learn as much as possible about the upgrade and compare it to the current system configuration. I setup meetings with our IT and production departments to discuss all of differences between the old and new systems. They helped me chart out all of the major procedural changes that will result from the new system, while also explaining the processes and functions that will remain the same. I took that information to the PM supervisors and asked them to rate the changes based on the level of impact they will have on their staff. Because the feedback from the supervisors was fairly consistent, I was able to pinpoint the key procedures that would be affected by the upgrade. I also sent surveys to the portfolio managers and their supervisors to find out what kind of questions or problems they were having with the current system. I wanted to see if there was any current training or procedural issues that could be addressed if we decided to implement a training program for the upgrade.
In order to understand the impact of the software upgrade, I also analyzed the staff that will be affected and the tasks that they perform within the application. I gathered lots of information about the tool through informal discussions with PM’s. They explained the importance of the data retrieved and showed me how financial decisions are made based on the figures that the application produces. At this point, I was unknowingly performing a task analysis as I compared that information to all of the actions that PM’s make on an account each day. I had to understand whether or not every PM managed accounts in a similar fashion, or do they each have investing ideologies that they apply to their job? Did this software’s usefulness depend on the PM’s investing styles? I wanted to know exactly what the participants would need to understand about the application if we decided to offer training on it. What did they need to be able to do within the application in order to do their jobs successfully? In order to analyze the task at hand, I set up additional meetings with the supervisors, and spoke to experienced PM’s to better understand the tasks that ALL portfolio managers have to perform within this tool. I also needed to identify the level of impact the new application would have on the way they currently performed each task and begin listing the knowledge and skills they had to have to perform certain functions.
Once I compiled and organized all of my feedback and research, I met with my supervisor to discuss training options. We needed to decide if this upgrade warranted classroom training, a web-based tutorial, or a detailed email explaining the changes. Because we were dealing with a tool that controlled client assets, and because there was going to be new functions in different screens within the application, we decided that a web-based, self-guided training module would be the most effective solution. Since I didn’t receive any feedback from the PM’s that would warrant training on existing issues, I could focus the lesson on the upcoming upgrades and create a training course that provided detailed illustrations on how the changes will affect their daily transactions.
In order to understand the impact of the software upgrade, I also analyzed the staff that will be affected and the tasks that they perform within the application. I gathered lots of information about the tool through informal discussions with PM’s. They explained the importance of the data retrieved and showed me how financial decisions are made based on the figures that the application produces. At this point, I was unknowingly performing a task analysis as I compared that information to all of the actions that PM’s make on an account each day. I had to understand whether or not every PM managed accounts in a similar fashion, or do they each have investing ideologies that they apply to their job? Did this software’s usefulness depend on the PM’s investing styles? I wanted to know exactly what the participants would need to understand about the application if we decided to offer training on it. What did they need to be able to do within the application in order to do their jobs successfully? In order to analyze the task at hand, I set up additional meetings with the supervisors, and spoke to experienced PM’s to better understand the tasks that ALL portfolio managers have to perform within this tool. I also needed to identify the level of impact the new application would have on the way they currently performed each task and begin listing the knowledge and skills they had to have to perform certain functions.
Once I compiled and organized all of my feedback and research, I met with my supervisor to discuss training options. We needed to decide if this upgrade warranted classroom training, a web-based tutorial, or a detailed email explaining the changes. Because we were dealing with a tool that controlled client assets, and because there was going to be new functions in different screens within the application, we decided that a web-based, self-guided training module would be the most effective solution. Since I didn’t receive any feedback from the PM’s that would warrant training on existing issues, I could focus the lesson on the upcoming upgrades and create a training course that provided detailed illustrations on how the changes will affect their daily transactions.
Erin - Journal #2
As teachers, I believe we constantly do needs and task analyses without even thinking about it most of the time. I most commonly do a needs analysis before starting a new story in the Anthology. I need to look over the story and the teaching materials to see what concepts are taught in the story, and then choose one or two to focus on with my students. I think about what skills the students still need to learn or need more practice with, and what background knowledge they need before starting to read. Looking at the needs analysis models in chapter 5, I believe this most closely corresponds to the Rossett’s Five-Step Approach because it involves looking at already-created materials, seeing what the students know about a concept before beginning a unit, and look for or create any other needed materials.
One time I completed a task analysis was before starting the first full-process writing assignment this year. I needed to analyze the steps I would need to take with the students to complete a well-written paper. The goal was a 5 paragraph “Response to Literature” essay, which is a difficult skill at the beginning of the year. I needed teach the students how to choose text support, create a thesis statement, and write an interesting beginning, among other things. Then, I needed to decide how to teach each so that the students could write these essays, but also understand how to apply this technique to similar essays they may have in the future. This relates to the Dick, Carey, and Carey model because I looked at the subordinate skills the students needed to complete the larger project.
I believe that learner analysis is closely related to task and needs analyses, and that all three are necessary for effective instruction. In looking at chapter 7, one question that arose for me was: Can motivation be both intrinsic and extrinsic? For example, completing my master’s degree will help me further my career, but I also chose a path that seemed interesting to me.
School children are definitely a captive audience, and I wonder if there isn’t a way to allow middle and possibly elementary school students to at least have choice in one class, such as an elective. I know this is something that comes up every time I work on persuasive essays with students – they want to get to choose a class that they take. Maybe if they were able to choose just one, it would make them more willing participants in their other, required classes.
Regarding the different approaches, Mager’s approach seemed very involved to me and almost like you could end up with too much information. Smith and Ragan’s was confusing at first with the stable and changing similarities and differences, and took some rereading before I felt like I began to understand it.
One time I completed a task analysis was before starting the first full-process writing assignment this year. I needed to analyze the steps I would need to take with the students to complete a well-written paper. The goal was a 5 paragraph “Response to Literature” essay, which is a difficult skill at the beginning of the year. I needed teach the students how to choose text support, create a thesis statement, and write an interesting beginning, among other things. Then, I needed to decide how to teach each so that the students could write these essays, but also understand how to apply this technique to similar essays they may have in the future. This relates to the Dick, Carey, and Carey model because I looked at the subordinate skills the students needed to complete the larger project.
I believe that learner analysis is closely related to task and needs analyses, and that all three are necessary for effective instruction. In looking at chapter 7, one question that arose for me was: Can motivation be both intrinsic and extrinsic? For example, completing my master’s degree will help me further my career, but I also chose a path that seemed interesting to me.
School children are definitely a captive audience, and I wonder if there isn’t a way to allow middle and possibly elementary school students to at least have choice in one class, such as an elective. I know this is something that comes up every time I work on persuasive essays with students – they want to get to choose a class that they take. Maybe if they were able to choose just one, it would make them more willing participants in their other, required classes.
Regarding the different approaches, Mager’s approach seemed very involved to me and almost like you could end up with too much information. Smith and Ragan’s was confusing at first with the stable and changing similarities and differences, and took some rereading before I felt like I began to understand it.
Journal Reflection 2
After reading through chapters 5-7, I learned that there are varying differences between the needs, task, and learner analyses. I was under the assumption that these analyses were far more complicated and quantitatively driven. I wondered how often these analyses were conducted in classrooms as I believe they are great tools for educators.
As I read through the chapters a second time, I was able to place an instance in which each particular analysis could’ve been used to assist me in the classroom or as an IEP case manager. I did find it tough, however, to remember each analysis and the steps that went along with them. Even after summarizing the steps and writing them in my own words, I found it difficult.
I was able to reflect on the readings and considered a situation in which I’ve been in for two years where I’ve informally implemented a needs and task analysis. My experience is below:
I act as the IEP SuperUser in my building. I’m responsible for disseminating information provided by county representatives about IEP changes and regulations to my team at the school. In addition, I’m the first point of contact when troubleshooting is needed with our IEP program.
This is my second year acting as the SuperUser. Last year I quickly learned the differences in each case manager’s skills with maneuvering through the online program and writing effective IEPs. I began to notice the large number of errors in IEPs we had as a department. Quarterly, error lists are distributed to the entire county for everyone to see. At the end of last year, I knew the following year had to be different.
In the beginning of this school year, I quickly and informally assessed the skills and knowledge of my team members. I found that one department member has difficulty with maneuvering through the program, has no troubleshooting skills, and has very little understanding of how to write an IEP. Another department member is skilled in the program as well as troubleshooting, but has very little knowledge of how to write an effective IEP. A third team member is shaky on all grounds.
By November, after fixing over 100 errors in the IEP system, I realized I had to act fast. So, I created a training session for the two individuals that needed extra assistance with troubleshooting and maneuvering. In addition, I came up with a cheat sheet to keep at their desks that outlined the most common trouble shooting instances.
I found it difficult to broach the topic of how to write an effective IEP with a particular team member. Instead of meeting one-on-one and singling anyone out, I prepared examples of properly written IEPs and provided copies to each member of the team at a department meeting. I shared that a suggestion was made to all SuperUsers that we review the example IEPs with our teams to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
If I had used Mager’s Performance Analysis when conducting my needs analysis, I would’ve taken the 12 steps to determine if a difference existed between what the team members are currently doing and what they should be doing and then find the reason for it. Additionally, if I had used the Dick, Carey and Carey’s Instructional Analysis as my task analysis, I would’ve identified the subordinate skills needed to achieve the goal of 100% compliance.
As I read through the chapters a second time, I was able to place an instance in which each particular analysis could’ve been used to assist me in the classroom or as an IEP case manager. I did find it tough, however, to remember each analysis and the steps that went along with them. Even after summarizing the steps and writing them in my own words, I found it difficult.
I was able to reflect on the readings and considered a situation in which I’ve been in for two years where I’ve informally implemented a needs and task analysis. My experience is below:
I act as the IEP SuperUser in my building. I’m responsible for disseminating information provided by county representatives about IEP changes and regulations to my team at the school. In addition, I’m the first point of contact when troubleshooting is needed with our IEP program.
This is my second year acting as the SuperUser. Last year I quickly learned the differences in each case manager’s skills with maneuvering through the online program and writing effective IEPs. I began to notice the large number of errors in IEPs we had as a department. Quarterly, error lists are distributed to the entire county for everyone to see. At the end of last year, I knew the following year had to be different.
In the beginning of this school year, I quickly and informally assessed the skills and knowledge of my team members. I found that one department member has difficulty with maneuvering through the program, has no troubleshooting skills, and has very little understanding of how to write an IEP. Another department member is skilled in the program as well as troubleshooting, but has very little knowledge of how to write an effective IEP. A third team member is shaky on all grounds.
By November, after fixing over 100 errors in the IEP system, I realized I had to act fast. So, I created a training session for the two individuals that needed extra assistance with troubleshooting and maneuvering. In addition, I came up with a cheat sheet to keep at their desks that outlined the most common trouble shooting instances.
I found it difficult to broach the topic of how to write an effective IEP with a particular team member. Instead of meeting one-on-one and singling anyone out, I prepared examples of properly written IEPs and provided copies to each member of the team at a department meeting. I shared that a suggestion was made to all SuperUsers that we review the example IEPs with our teams to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
If I had used Mager’s Performance Analysis when conducting my needs analysis, I would’ve taken the 12 steps to determine if a difference existed between what the team members are currently doing and what they should be doing and then find the reason for it. Additionally, if I had used the Dick, Carey and Carey’s Instructional Analysis as my task analysis, I would’ve identified the subordinate skills needed to achieve the goal of 100% compliance.
Neelam - Learning Journal 2
While reading the chapters on needs, task and learner analysis, I found myself to be revisiting some of the concepts and information I had learned previously through training and practice in my own field. These three types of analysis are used in various fields such as science, engineering, and economics; however they do have different terminology. For example, consultants in various fields frequently use a needs analysis tool known as the “Voice of the Customer Table” in various formats to understand the needs of their clients. Similarly there are countless number of approaches and tools available to conduct task and learner analysis in other fields. While conducting these analysis, my experience has been that it is very important to have subject-matter-expertise (SMEs) from diverse background. Previously, I have come across projects where despite conducting thorough needs analysis, some aspect of the requirement was somehow overlooked and many times it turns out that valuable baseline data can be overlooked if analysis are based on SMEs from same background. Needs analysis is basically the process of identifying the problem and learners analysis is the process of determining who is having the problem. If large numbers of SMEs and learners are involved, I think statistical technique should be used so that problem can not only be identified more thoroughly but the perspectives of the interested parties are also captured which may end up useful in the task analysis or the design itself. Overall, I think these three analysis are probably the most important steps in the instruction design process since coming up with the solutions is really not possible until the true nature of the problem is known. The nature of the problem will vary depending on situation, learners, learning environment, resources etc. That’s where the various approaches (Mager’s, Smith & Ragan, Dick / Carey / Carey) for conducting these analysis can come into play. Each instructional problem will have a goal that require proper tools and approaches. In my opinion, I found many of the approaches to overlap each other. I believe that instructional designer should have the flexibility to choose the components of various approaches and I would say that this skill can sharpen as more experience is gained through designing instructions of varying needs.
My past experiences connected highly with the last 3 lessons since all my engineering project have started with these three analysis. In my current field, instead of designing instructions I design various types of products from new materials and ingredients. There are many similarities in the process since at the end of the day a product (new instruction or new physical material) is being designed. In my line of work, various parties or SMEs are involved in the needs and learner analysis stage such as the soldiers in the field, program managers, other agencies, the congress, the tax payers etc. The results of these analyses are set of requirements of the new products that are approved by the end-user (usually the solider). The product requirement are compared with the set of existing performance data (example Rossett’s Five Step Approach), based on this the technology gaps, problems and the goals are identified. The task analysis in our case is generally the scientific approach of coming up with best set of solutions to fill the technology gaps. These solutions are further prioritized based on their success rating, which is generally also a systematic process. There are so many approaches available for conducting these analyses in my line of work but currently the Six Sigma Design Processes are being recommended as these have been highly successful in the industry specifically in the new product development, prototyping and manufacturing environment. In fact, some of the standardized testing in education may have been influenced by the industrial practices. Trend of current education system is towards producing citizens similar to producing products in factory with certain qualities. In case of educational system, these citizens need to have certain behavioral and intellectual qualities which are measured by the test standards.
The major question that was raised for me was in terms of generalization. Since many of these approaches described in the chapters did overlap, I wonder if any researchers in the field have made efforts to combine the various approaches and prepared a generalized version which maybe applicable in any situation. Additionally, I am also curious to find out to what extent six sigma processes have been used in designing instructions. One of my colleagues recently completed her PhD in the field of Education. She also has background in the field of Chemical Engineering and in application of Six Sigma. She did use some Six Sigma tools while working on her thesis through I do not have all the details of how these tools were used. Future discussions with her will probably answer some of these questions that have come up for me during the recent class reading.
My past experiences connected highly with the last 3 lessons since all my engineering project have started with these three analysis. In my current field, instead of designing instructions I design various types of products from new materials and ingredients. There are many similarities in the process since at the end of the day a product (new instruction or new physical material) is being designed. In my line of work, various parties or SMEs are involved in the needs and learner analysis stage such as the soldiers in the field, program managers, other agencies, the congress, the tax payers etc. The results of these analyses are set of requirements of the new products that are approved by the end-user (usually the solider). The product requirement are compared with the set of existing performance data (example Rossett’s Five Step Approach), based on this the technology gaps, problems and the goals are identified. The task analysis in our case is generally the scientific approach of coming up with best set of solutions to fill the technology gaps. These solutions are further prioritized based on their success rating, which is generally also a systematic process. There are so many approaches available for conducting these analyses in my line of work but currently the Six Sigma Design Processes are being recommended as these have been highly successful in the industry specifically in the new product development, prototyping and manufacturing environment. In fact, some of the standardized testing in education may have been influenced by the industrial practices. Trend of current education system is towards producing citizens similar to producing products in factory with certain qualities. In case of educational system, these citizens need to have certain behavioral and intellectual qualities which are measured by the test standards.
The major question that was raised for me was in terms of generalization. Since many of these approaches described in the chapters did overlap, I wonder if any researchers in the field have made efforts to combine the various approaches and prepared a generalized version which maybe applicable in any situation. Additionally, I am also curious to find out to what extent six sigma processes have been used in designing instructions. One of my colleagues recently completed her PhD in the field of Education. She also has background in the field of Chemical Engineering and in application of Six Sigma. She did use some Six Sigma tools while working on her thesis through I do not have all the details of how these tools were used. Future discussions with her will probably answer some of these questions that have come up for me during the recent class reading.
Christine Forrester's Learner Analysis Blog # 2
The three chapters that I have read in our textbook, The Essentials of Instructional Design, are so relevant to what I do every day in my classroom, on my team, and in the professional learning community I am a part of at Bel Air Middle School. I am continually doing needs analysis in an informal manner. Needs analysis can be as simple as evaluating student responses to a drill or closure activity. Analyzing pre and post test scores also forces me to conduct a needs analysis for my students.
As I read chapter 6, on task analysis, It became apparent that this part of the ID process is a crucial part of the instructional planning I do for every unit and every lesson I teach. Again, I do not do a formal task analysis, using one of the defined models in chapter 6, but I do determine the type of content and skills that need to be included in my instruction.
Analyzing learners is also something that any teacher does, but to be truthful I am still trying to digest what I read in chapter 7. I never really gave any thought to analyzing the learners in my classroom - I always assumed that they are who they are and I need to figure out how best to teach them. When I really think about learner analysis as it applies to my job, I think that analysis of individual learners that I teach occurs on my team during team meetings with my team mates, special educators, administration, and guidance counselors. We have the opportunity, once a week, to examine the human needs of our students as they are outlined in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. My team is also given the opportunity two-three times a week to examine the academic needs of our students. When I sit down to do my weekly planning, I am unconsciously using parts of some of the models outlined in chapter 7; such as step three in Mager's Approach, and all of the steps as they are written in Heinich, Molenda, Russell, and Smaldino's Approach.
I am not sure that I have ever really given "real" conscious thought to needs, task, or learner analysis and I don't ever recall formally learning about the various approches to these steps of the ID process. I am a approaching this class, what I am learning, and the semester project lightly. I am not too sure how to apply all of this new information and hope that by working in class with Dr. Lohnes and my project group that I can somehow sort through all of this new information and then choose the best approaches to use with my project. All I know is that I am going to need a lot of guidance while working on my instructional design project this semester.
As I read chapter 6, on task analysis, It became apparent that this part of the ID process is a crucial part of the instructional planning I do for every unit and every lesson I teach. Again, I do not do a formal task analysis, using one of the defined models in chapter 6, but I do determine the type of content and skills that need to be included in my instruction.
Analyzing learners is also something that any teacher does, but to be truthful I am still trying to digest what I read in chapter 7. I never really gave any thought to analyzing the learners in my classroom - I always assumed that they are who they are and I need to figure out how best to teach them. When I really think about learner analysis as it applies to my job, I think that analysis of individual learners that I teach occurs on my team during team meetings with my team mates, special educators, administration, and guidance counselors. We have the opportunity, once a week, to examine the human needs of our students as they are outlined in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. My team is also given the opportunity two-three times a week to examine the academic needs of our students. When I sit down to do my weekly planning, I am unconsciously using parts of some of the models outlined in chapter 7; such as step three in Mager's Approach, and all of the steps as they are written in Heinich, Molenda, Russell, and Smaldino's Approach.
I am not sure that I have ever really given "real" conscious thought to needs, task, or learner analysis and I don't ever recall formally learning about the various approches to these steps of the ID process. I am a approaching this class, what I am learning, and the semester project lightly. I am not too sure how to apply all of this new information and hope that by working in class with Dr. Lohnes and my project group that I can somehow sort through all of this new information and then choose the best approaches to use with my project. All I know is that I am going to need a lot of guidance while working on my instructional design project this semester.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Learner Analysis
I feel that in order for successful instruction to take place you have to beware of your target audience. I find myself dealing with this all the time when I am doing my instructional planning for the week. As a media specialist I work with different grade levels so I present different skills different ways depending on the age and capablities of the group I am working with. There are certain concepts or library skills that are taught at each different grade level, so what is developmental appropriate for each grade level is considered as well. I travel between four different schools and so deal with different types of population that bring to the table different experiences. A learner analysis, although not an exact science ,is important. You don't want to present concepts that is above your target audiences head or that they can't relate to in any way. You have to be aware of how the learner may react to the instruction or apply or use it. I never thought about making sure the basic human needs of the learner take place before any instruction is begun. I know this is why schools offer breakfast and reduced school lunches. You can't keep your mind on what is to be learned if you are hungry or thirsty. I like Mager list for collecting data on the target audience. It is understandable and easy to follow. I never thought about considering why someone is taking a course(their motivation). In the school population you mainly deal with I have to take this as opposed to I took it for my own enrichment or because it would move me up in my career. If I consider the main reason I took this course is because it is a required course within my program and the reason I'm in the program is to move up in my career choice. There is a lot to consider when you consider your target audience, but they are important to keep in mind in order to make your instruction successful.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Tracie - Learning Journal #2
As I read through these three chapters on needs, task, and learner analysis, I realized how much we as teachers do this on a daily basis, albeit informally. I remember learning about needs analysis in my curriculum grad class about fifteen years ago. I don't, however remember task or learner analysis. This made we wonder if they were even used then, and when I checked the dates in the book, they were all 1997 or later. This would have been well after my Master's work was complete, but I'm not sure if the book simply used the latest research to cite.
I found the chapter on learner analysis (Chap. 7) very interesting. Maslow's hierarchy on p. 124 reminded me that many of our students come in with the bottom two sections unmet. They are needing breakfast, or witnessed an ugly fight between their parents, and this reminded me that until those needs are met, the student is very much a captive audience. Then again, so are all teachers at most of the inservices we attend!
I have to admit, I really did not understand the distinctions being made in Smith and Ragan's approach (p. 129-131). I am hoping we can talk about this at class on Thursday. Okay, as I sit and reread to write this, I think I'm starting to get it - I was comparing them wrong. Stable similarities are the things all humans have - eyes, ears, etc., and changing similarities are those physical things that can change - physical dexterity, intellect, etc. Stable differences are things like learning style - it is different among people but doesn't generally change. Changing differences are things like skills, beliefs etc. that are different among people but can still change over time.
I was excited to see the sections on Universal Design. I am part of a professional learning community using UD to create lessons that are accessible for all students. We are uploading them to SharePoint so teachers around the county can use them. It's good work.
I did an informal needs assessment when trying to determine what teachers in our school need/do to try to achieve Green School status. I sent out a survey to all teachers with questions such as, "Do you know what a Green School is?", and "Have you ever taught a lesson that promotes Green School ideas?", and "Would you be willing to learn more about Green schools?". From the answers to this survey, we were able to form a Green School comittee with people who were interested, and start the training for people who had never heard of it before. I think this is most in line with Rossett's five step approach, since we conducted the needs assessment in stages, then used the findings for decision making (p. 97).
My task analysis example is actually from my classroom. In 5th grade, students are supposed to receive an introductory lesson on microscopes. First I do an informal needs assessment by giving a pretest, then I try to determine which steps students are the weakest in. From there, I have to break down the steps for using a microscope into sections. We start with everyone having a microscope in front of them and pointing to the parts. Then, they practice the steps to correctly focus with nothing on the stage. Then, I give them a prepared slide to practice on, because the objects they are looking at do not move. Finally, I give them a live culture to try to focus on and draw. With some students, we may have to repeat tasks until they can complete them successfully, but by midyear, all students are using microscopes independently - even my special education kids. I think this is most similar to Dick, Carey, and Carey's Instructional Analysis since this has a very specific goal - focusing the microscope - and a specific set of subordinate skills necessary to perform the instructional goal.
I found the chapter on learner analysis (Chap. 7) very interesting. Maslow's hierarchy on p. 124 reminded me that many of our students come in with the bottom two sections unmet. They are needing breakfast, or witnessed an ugly fight between their parents, and this reminded me that until those needs are met, the student is very much a captive audience. Then again, so are all teachers at most of the inservices we attend!
I have to admit, I really did not understand the distinctions being made in Smith and Ragan's approach (p. 129-131). I am hoping we can talk about this at class on Thursday. Okay, as I sit and reread to write this, I think I'm starting to get it - I was comparing them wrong. Stable similarities are the things all humans have - eyes, ears, etc., and changing similarities are those physical things that can change - physical dexterity, intellect, etc. Stable differences are things like learning style - it is different among people but doesn't generally change. Changing differences are things like skills, beliefs etc. that are different among people but can still change over time.
I was excited to see the sections on Universal Design. I am part of a professional learning community using UD to create lessons that are accessible for all students. We are uploading them to SharePoint so teachers around the county can use them. It's good work.
I did an informal needs assessment when trying to determine what teachers in our school need/do to try to achieve Green School status. I sent out a survey to all teachers with questions such as, "Do you know what a Green School is?", and "Have you ever taught a lesson that promotes Green School ideas?", and "Would you be willing to learn more about Green schools?". From the answers to this survey, we were able to form a Green School comittee with people who were interested, and start the training for people who had never heard of it before. I think this is most in line with Rossett's five step approach, since we conducted the needs assessment in stages, then used the findings for decision making (p. 97).
My task analysis example is actually from my classroom. In 5th grade, students are supposed to receive an introductory lesson on microscopes. First I do an informal needs assessment by giving a pretest, then I try to determine which steps students are the weakest in. From there, I have to break down the steps for using a microscope into sections. We start with everyone having a microscope in front of them and pointing to the parts. Then, they practice the steps to correctly focus with nothing on the stage. Then, I give them a prepared slide to practice on, because the objects they are looking at do not move. Finally, I give them a live culture to try to focus on and draw. With some students, we may have to repeat tasks until they can complete them successfully, but by midyear, all students are using microscopes independently - even my special education kids. I think this is most similar to Dick, Carey, and Carey's Instructional Analysis since this has a very specific goal - focusing the microscope - and a specific set of subordinate skills necessary to perform the instructional goal.
Jen's Blog 2
A time that I have done an informal needs analysis was when I start a new math unit. I give a pretest before starting any unit. I identify the objectives that students seem to have a difficult time with. I look at the question. I try to determine why the students did not get this problem. Often I know that reason is simple formatting or exposure. I know students will get the skill once I have model those types of problems. Sometimes I know it is a skill that students just do not have and will struggle with. I think that my process most closely coincides with Rossett’s Five-Step Approach. The questions on the pre-test represent skills students should be able to complete by the end of the unit. This is determining the optimal performance. By giving the students the pretest I am able to examine how they approached the problem and any misconceptions they may have. I am determining their actual performance at that given time. I do not take in consideration the third step which is feelings. To me feelings are more a learner analysis piece. When I analyze the learner I want to know their interest and learning styles to make the instruction match them best. I do try to examine the causes. The common errors or knowing my students’ skills before the test indicate the cause to me. Last step is solutions. My question is the solution your instructions and how you approach it? That is how I interpret it in my classroom. Knowing my students, their misconceptions, and the skills needed I think about how I going to teach this unit. It seems to me that need analysis, task analysis, and learner analysis all overlap each other. To have the big picture you need to have all three. As I read the chapter one thing I wondered was is my objective, the voluntary state curriculum, or is my assessment my end goal. The assessment and the objective match but as I stated earlier often problems arise in formatting. First graders can verbalize more than they can write but we assess them in reading on their written responses. I find myself questioning do I want my students to able to summarize or write a summary. Is their written summary a writing goal or a reading goal? An example of task analysis I completed informally was when teaching place value. Students need to see 6 +7 = 13 is the same as 10 + 3 =13. This concept proved to be very difficult for my students. I broke the task down to showing teen number with ten sticks and one blocks. Then we used the maniplatives to show number equations. Then we moved on to exchanging ones for tens and extra ones. We would then show equations and exchange if necessary. I think that my step match most closely with Dick, Carey, and Carey. I thought about what they had to do at the end and backwards mapped. I also thought about subordinate skills they needed such as exchanging ones for ten sticks. As I have read through these chapters each time one particular approach seems to make more sense to me and seems to be more applicable to my classroom. I wonder if that is because they are the approaches that most resemble my own approach to creating my instruction. Is there one approach for each situation and each time I happen to be working with the same learners in the same environment?
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Journal #1
After reading through the different philosophies, several times, I decided that I “borrow ideas from different perspective” which means I follow the philosophy of eclecticism. I believe that teaching encompasses many different philosophies in order to meet the needs of all students and to be an effective teacher. For example the philosophies of positivism are based on logic which is needed when teaching math, science, and even history as we teach the order of events or when archeologist are uncovering artifacts. Also, some students’ way of learning is more concrete than others and the only way to get an answer is a step by step process. Interpretivism is often used when teaching students about Ancient World History, the beginning of civilization and through artifacts there truth is created. Constructivism is often used when trying to have students make connections. Again, because I teach Ancient World History, students do not have a lot of background knowledge but if a teacher identifies objective students can then attempt to make a personal connection so that they can generate a mental model to help them understand the concept. One example is teaching the 3 branches of the government and having students play rock, paper, scissors. Then there is behaviorism and cognitivism which I believe are commonly used by teachers and learners. Teachers often use the behaviorism philosophy as a part of their classroom management while the cognitive philosophy is for content and delivering material. Students or learners are also influenced by these philosophies. Learners are influenced by environmental events (pg. 50) and by doing, engaging, and experience (pg. 49).
Chapters 1-3
-What did you learn?
In these chapters, I’ve learned the different views on cognition; the theories and philosophies on thinking and learning; as well as the models of instructional design and the purposes of them.
- What questions were raised for you?
When the more historical philosophies were devised, were test subjects used to confirm the theories?
-Where do I fit in?
When it comes to cognition and learning, I fit into to both the modern and post-modernism theories. I learn in more of a linear way – I need each step broken down for me, bit by bit, with an example for each part. When approaching teaching others, I apply my learning style as well a non-linear approach that is needed for others. I give each of my students an interest inventory and assess their learning style prior to the development of my lessons so that I can tailor the lessons to suit their needs.
- How did you connect what you learned to your past experiences?
I recalled how nervous I was when learning I had been assigned to co-teach Algebra my first year of teaching. I was frightened since I didn’t major in math and had a terrible Algebra teacher in high school. I took the book home and began reading through the chapters. After the second chapter, I realized I needed to review the material in a different way. I asked a colleague to work with me and to provide individual examples broken down step-by-step. After the visuals and steps, along with practice on my part, I was more than comfortable to break it down for my students.
- What struggles did you have?
I had difficulty linking specific examples to the historical perspectives and more current philosophies.
-Where do you see yourself fitting in?
I don’t see myself fitting into one specific category, but two: behaviorism and constructivism.
-How do you view things such as learning, teaching and the design of instruction?
In my opinion, learning, teaching and the design of instruction should be approached on a case-by-case basis. The design of instruction and teaching should never be developed until you have your learners modality determined.
In these chapters, I’ve learned the different views on cognition; the theories and philosophies on thinking and learning; as well as the models of instructional design and the purposes of them.
- What questions were raised for you?
When the more historical philosophies were devised, were test subjects used to confirm the theories?
-Where do I fit in?
When it comes to cognition and learning, I fit into to both the modern and post-modernism theories. I learn in more of a linear way – I need each step broken down for me, bit by bit, with an example for each part. When approaching teaching others, I apply my learning style as well a non-linear approach that is needed for others. I give each of my students an interest inventory and assess their learning style prior to the development of my lessons so that I can tailor the lessons to suit their needs.
- How did you connect what you learned to your past experiences?
I recalled how nervous I was when learning I had been assigned to co-teach Algebra my first year of teaching. I was frightened since I didn’t major in math and had a terrible Algebra teacher in high school. I took the book home and began reading through the chapters. After the second chapter, I realized I needed to review the material in a different way. I asked a colleague to work with me and to provide individual examples broken down step-by-step. After the visuals and steps, along with practice on my part, I was more than comfortable to break it down for my students.
- What struggles did you have?
I had difficulty linking specific examples to the historical perspectives and more current philosophies.
-Where do you see yourself fitting in?
I don’t see myself fitting into one specific category, but two: behaviorism and constructivism.
-How do you view things such as learning, teaching and the design of instruction?
In my opinion, learning, teaching and the design of instruction should be approached on a case-by-case basis. The design of instruction and teaching should never be developed until you have your learners modality determined.
Erin Bates Journal Entry 1
Much of what I read, particularly chapters 2 and 3 in The Essentials of Instructional Design, reminded me of what I learned in my undergraduate education classes. I remember learning about the ideas of psychologists, such as Pavlov and Skinner, in my educational psychology class and about the philosophies behind learning during my introduction to philosophy course. Then last semester, in ISTC 541, we discussed behaviorism and constructivism. It was a benefit to have this prior knowledge to look back on as I was reading.
Something that I’ve heard in all of my education classes is that the student must be involved in his or her education. This also reminds me of the Confucius quote, “I do and I understand.” Most students remember and can reproduce what they DO in the classroom, not necessarily what they saw or heard.
One of my greatest struggles in the reading was all the vocabulary. I felt as though I had to keep going back to earlier portions of the chapter or of the article to check that I wasn’t mixing up words and definitions. A struggle I’m having with the information is how to apply it in the classroom. We are kept to so tight of a schedule and are told what concepts to study with each story, that there isn’t always time to be creative or to use some of the strategies for varied learning.
In the article, Merrill discussed that students need to be shown how to apply something to the real world in order for it to be more meaningful. In language arts, when we read stories in the anthology, the tests are basically comprehension questions. (“Name three character traits of ______,” “List the events that cause suspense,”) Within the last few stories, I have begun to realize that it would be more meaningful if I taught the strategies using the anthology story, and then tested them on whether or not they could apply the reading strategies. When the students take the MSA and the L.A. midterm, they have a passage that they have never seen before to read and questions to answer. I feel that I am better preparing them for such assessments.
As a teacher, I believe that it is important to understand the different philosophies and to draw from each one depending on what subject and concept is being taught. For example, there is frequently “no right answer” in language arts – stories can be interpreted in different ways – but in math, there is a correct way of applying a formula, but usually different ways to get the same correct answer.
Something that I’ve heard in all of my education classes is that the student must be involved in his or her education. This also reminds me of the Confucius quote, “I do and I understand.” Most students remember and can reproduce what they DO in the classroom, not necessarily what they saw or heard.
One of my greatest struggles in the reading was all the vocabulary. I felt as though I had to keep going back to earlier portions of the chapter or of the article to check that I wasn’t mixing up words and definitions. A struggle I’m having with the information is how to apply it in the classroom. We are kept to so tight of a schedule and are told what concepts to study with each story, that there isn’t always time to be creative or to use some of the strategies for varied learning.
In the article, Merrill discussed that students need to be shown how to apply something to the real world in order for it to be more meaningful. In language arts, when we read stories in the anthology, the tests are basically comprehension questions. (“Name three character traits of ______,” “List the events that cause suspense,”) Within the last few stories, I have begun to realize that it would be more meaningful if I taught the strategies using the anthology story, and then tested them on whether or not they could apply the reading strategies. When the students take the MSA and the L.A. midterm, they have a passage that they have never seen before to read and questions to answer. I feel that I am better preparing them for such assessments.
As a teacher, I believe that it is important to understand the different philosophies and to draw from each one depending on what subject and concept is being taught. For example, there is frequently “no right answer” in language arts – stories can be interpreted in different ways – but in math, there is a correct way of applying a formula, but usually different ways to get the same correct answer.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Instructional Perspectives - Bob Young
As I read the Merrill piece I remembered things that I had been taught to do when preparing lesson plans in mathematics. The similarity between my lesson planning instruction and Merrill’s Five Principles of Instruction is uncanny. To prepare a lesson I was taught to demonstrate the lesson, have the students apply the lesson, then give them a task to perform and relate the entire lesson to a real world situation. The prior knowledge principle is always incorporated in lesson planning. It is interesting how closely related my lesson planning instructions and Merrill’s principles of instruction are.
Going into my 11th year of teaching I see myself as a behaviorist in some respect because I am focusing on my students ‘outward behavior’ in class as I deliver instruction. I know by their ‘blank stare’ that they are not getting the lesson and I will adapt the lesson accordingly. In my planning stages of instruction I am a pragmatic eclectic. I will use any type of lesson from any philosophy as long as it works. If it does not work I don’t use it again. I like the cognitive perspective but I believe that the cognitive approach is more aligned with curriculum design than classroom delivery of that curriculum. And I am a classroom teacher.
Going into my 11th year of teaching I see myself as a behaviorist in some respect because I am focusing on my students ‘outward behavior’ in class as I deliver instruction. I know by their ‘blank stare’ that they are not getting the lesson and I will adapt the lesson accordingly. In my planning stages of instruction I am a pragmatic eclectic. I will use any type of lesson from any philosophy as long as it works. If it does not work I don’t use it again. I like the cognitive perspective but I believe that the cognitive approach is more aligned with curriculum design than classroom delivery of that curriculum. And I am a classroom teacher.
Phil Holliday Journal Entry #1
These theories are extremely deep…so deep that I find it difficult to understand what drives somebody to create such mind-boggling philosophies on how humans obtain knowledge. But at the same time, if I want my training materials to be effective and useful to my participants, I need to have a firm understanding on how the information is going to be processed through the learner’s mind when he/she takes it in.
So far we have only read about a handful of learning theories. The scary part is that there are hundreds and hundreds more that have been documented since the ancient times. Although each of the theories has its’ own unique claims, I see my instructional habits as being most closely associated with the pragmatic style of learning. I think that I tailor my training style to the belief that no two people have the same learning habits. I believe that everyone prefers to learn in a way that has worked for them in the past, which results in a diverse range of learning habits. If someone has had positive learning experiences with webinars, chances are they’re going to benefit from web-based training in the future. But if that same person had a negative experience in a lecture-based class, there’s a good chance they are going to struggle in future classes that are dominated by lectures.
But in order for that person to form an opinion on the course, they have to interpret it in a certain manner. This is where “Interpretivism” comes into play. If the student is actively engaged in the course, easily making sense of the content, then it’s that they have a positive interpretation of everything the course entails. As they sit in class, the student’s mind is active in forming that judgment: “Does the professor talk funny? Is someone in the class distracting me? Is class almost over?” As the student asks himself these questions, his mind is subconsciously forming an opinion of the course. If the material is entertaining, then the student might be more engaged in the content. But regardless, everything that went through the student’s mind for the past 180 minutes comes together to determine the level of learning he achieved in your class (Cognitivism).
A Pragmatic believes that if something works now, it will work again in the future. I need to consider this when I design my course materials. I need to make my classes as diverse as possible to meet the training needs of the participants. Everybody has had unique learning experiences in the past, and it’s important for me to consider those experiences throughout the design process. I would be ignorant to make a 2 week course 100% web-based. I have to be aware of the fact that not everybody in the class is comfortable with online training…probably because of a prior negative experience. How effective is my training going to be for that person if they have already formed an opinion of my course before it even starts? If I can create a course based on a blended learning solution, incorporating classroom, web-based, OJT, etc…into the program, then I am meeting the training needs of a broader audience, and not just the few people who enjoy online training.
Internal Use Only
So far we have only read about a handful of learning theories. The scary part is that there are hundreds and hundreds more that have been documented since the ancient times. Although each of the theories has its’ own unique claims, I see my instructional habits as being most closely associated with the pragmatic style of learning. I think that I tailor my training style to the belief that no two people have the same learning habits. I believe that everyone prefers to learn in a way that has worked for them in the past, which results in a diverse range of learning habits. If someone has had positive learning experiences with webinars, chances are they’re going to benefit from web-based training in the future. But if that same person had a negative experience in a lecture-based class, there’s a good chance they are going to struggle in future classes that are dominated by lectures.
But in order for that person to form an opinion on the course, they have to interpret it in a certain manner. This is where “Interpretivism” comes into play. If the student is actively engaged in the course, easily making sense of the content, then it’s that they have a positive interpretation of everything the course entails. As they sit in class, the student’s mind is active in forming that judgment: “Does the professor talk funny? Is someone in the class distracting me? Is class almost over?” As the student asks himself these questions, his mind is subconsciously forming an opinion of the course. If the material is entertaining, then the student might be more engaged in the content. But regardless, everything that went through the student’s mind for the past 180 minutes comes together to determine the level of learning he achieved in your class (Cognitivism).
A Pragmatic believes that if something works now, it will work again in the future. I need to consider this when I design my course materials. I need to make my classes as diverse as possible to meet the training needs of the participants. Everybody has had unique learning experiences in the past, and it’s important for me to consider those experiences throughout the design process. I would be ignorant to make a 2 week course 100% web-based. I have to be aware of the fact that not everybody in the class is comfortable with online training…probably because of a prior negative experience. How effective is my training going to be for that person if they have already formed an opinion of my course before it even starts? If I can create a course based on a blended learning solution, incorporating classroom, web-based, OJT, etc…into the program, then I am meeting the training needs of a broader audience, and not just the few people who enjoy online training.
Internal Use Only
Christine Forrester/Journal Post 1
Well, I am overwhelmed! There are so many ways that people think and learn. I have learned the following: When you just memorize new information, the likelihood that you will forget it is increased. I also learned that through cognitive and behaviorist learning, experience and mental recognition and reward for a given response is a natural part of how we learn. Application of what we have learned is proof of comprehension and making connections with prior knowledge and is aligned with Bloom’s Hierarchy of learning. As an educator, I love that there are so many styles of thinking and learning. For me, this keeps me on my toes and constantly looking for new ways to present instruction to my students and new ways to help them apply what they are learning in my class. I also like the postmodern approach in that there is more than one answer to a problem instead of just one. I like this because it accounts for all learning styles. The very best way to approach content is to choose the appropriate learning style that will be necessary for thinking and learning to take place. The dynamics of a group of students should also be taken into consideration; the approach that works successfully with one class, may or may not work with another class. I find that every year, each of my five academic classes present unique ways of thinking and learning. Again, a combination and room for flexibility in planning is necessary, in order for effective learning and connection to take place within my students.
The questions I have, with regard to this week’s readings, are how to choose the best approaches to instructional design and effective learning. I don’t think that I always make the best choices for my students. Is one approach better than the others? Does this decision depend on the types of students and dynamics of a class? In my opinion, Pavlov’s approach is useful when teaching skills- based lessons. If higher level thinking, and rigor, are to take place in a classroom, I believe that steps 4, 5, and 6, application, comprehension, and knowledge must be instilled in a lesson plan.
One last note: that while reading about cognitivism, constructivism, and postmodernism, I agreed and identified with these perspectives to a degree. Mental processes can be identified in many cases and the human mind, hence thinking, is very complex. I totally agree with the constructivist view in that learning and thinking are directly connected to a person’s understanding of the world and their experiences. Postmodernism piggy-backs on this thought, in that a person’s reality is based on their experiences and the realities in their life. This is constantly changing and depends on a person’s interpretation of the world in which they live.
The questions I have, with regard to this week’s readings, are how to choose the best approaches to instructional design and effective learning. I don’t think that I always make the best choices for my students. Is one approach better than the others? Does this decision depend on the types of students and dynamics of a class? In my opinion, Pavlov’s approach is useful when teaching skills- based lessons. If higher level thinking, and rigor, are to take place in a classroom, I believe that steps 4, 5, and 6, application, comprehension, and knowledge must be instilled in a lesson plan.
One last note: that while reading about cognitivism, constructivism, and postmodernism, I agreed and identified with these perspectives to a degree. Mental processes can be identified in many cases and the human mind, hence thinking, is very complex. I totally agree with the constructivist view in that learning and thinking are directly connected to a person’s understanding of the world and their experiences. Postmodernism piggy-backs on this thought, in that a person’s reality is based on their experiences and the realities in their life. This is constantly changing and depends on a person’s interpretation of the world in which they live.
Neelam - Learning Journal 1
The readings so far helped me to develop a "Big Picture" in my mind in regards to the field of Instructional Design. As a future Instructional Designer, I think it was good for me to learn up front about the various definitions, perspectives and models of the instructional design. Personally, I resonated highly with the definition of instructional design as a process and a science, probably because of my background that field. Knowing the roots of instructional design helped me to understand where the field is coming from, the governing characteristics and where it is heading. I have always learned by picking the best from the resources that were available and for this reason, I thought that the eclecticism and the postmodern approaches to instruction design would be interesting to work with. Previously, when I learned various subject matters or skills, I never really paid attention to the process that was taking place inside my mind. Reading about the various ways (Behaviorism, Congitivism, Constructivism, Postmodernism) forced me to reflect upon some of the ways in which I have previously used for "thinking", "learning" and "teaching". I felt that at one point or another, I have encountered most of these approaches. I studied in the India up to 8th grade and I remember that behaviorism was highly used; whereas, in the USA, I found the mixture of all of the approaches. Personally, I couldn't align myself with any single approach; rather I felt that eclectic approach would be more ideal as one needs to select an approach best for a particular situation and to fulfill stated learning objectives. I can't wait to explore the various tools, theories and approaches while working on the class project to get the first hand experience.
Tracie's Learning Journal #1
As I read through the chapters in the text, I realized that much of chapters 2 and 3 are a review of what I learned in college - both undergrad and graduate work. Honestly though, after teaching as long as I have, I don't think much about why I do things a certain way. After reading, I realized that I am somewhat a combination of a behaviorist and a constructivist, but the behaviorist is for my classroom management, and the constructivist is for actual instruction. I say this because I frequently use the behavioral, "I love the way Susie has cleaned off her desk and is ready for the lab. Thank you, Susie." And since everyone else wants the same praise, they quickly do the same thing. However, when I teach, I am constantly trying to connect what the kids already know or have experience with to what they are learning. Since I teach life science, it's not a big stretch.
I did find it interesting that all three philosophies, behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism say that the role of the learner must be that of active participant (p.49, 50, 51). What that tells me is that no matter what your philosophy, students must have an active role in their learning, or they will not retain the information. I also finally learned what it means when my speech pathologist tells me that I have two students with executive dysfunction. I was embarrassed to admit I had no idea what she was talking about - I had never heard of this dissability before. Now I understand that it is the inability to use higher order thinking skills as described on p. 32.
I do have a hard time with postmodernism. It seems way too PC for me. Especially the, "no single, object truth exists." I understand that there are many open-ended questions, and that by posing them to our students, we make them think. I guess my problem is in equating "truth" with "the right answer" (p. 19).
One thing I came away with from the Merrill article (other than a headache from all the definitions) was a new awareness of something I leave out in demonstrations. On p.5, Merrill points out that a presentation/demonstration should follow specific steps, one of them being to (3) Show the consequence of each step. I know that when I demonstrate and subsequently teach how to use a microscope, I leave this out. I should be explaining to kids what is happening as they turn the coarse adjustment knob, for example. This is something I want to stay aware of throughout the rest of the year in an attempt to improve my demonstration skills.
I guess overall, I am beginning to see instructional design as an intricate dance. There are so many possible steps and missteps, but the designer has to know the dancers before anything can be choreographed. Then, a careful balance must be created between the dancers skills and the steps, or the recital will be a disaster for both the dancers and the choreographer. Hmmm...I think I've been taking my daughter to too many ballet classes...
I did find it interesting that all three philosophies, behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism say that the role of the learner must be that of active participant (p.49, 50, 51). What that tells me is that no matter what your philosophy, students must have an active role in their learning, or they will not retain the information. I also finally learned what it means when my speech pathologist tells me that I have two students with executive dysfunction. I was embarrassed to admit I had no idea what she was talking about - I had never heard of this dissability before. Now I understand that it is the inability to use higher order thinking skills as described on p. 32.
I do have a hard time with postmodernism. It seems way too PC for me. Especially the, "no single, object truth exists." I understand that there are many open-ended questions, and that by posing them to our students, we make them think. I guess my problem is in equating "truth" with "the right answer" (p. 19).
One thing I came away with from the Merrill article (other than a headache from all the definitions) was a new awareness of something I leave out in demonstrations. On p.5, Merrill points out that a presentation/demonstration should follow specific steps, one of them being to (3) Show the consequence of each step. I know that when I demonstrate and subsequently teach how to use a microscope, I leave this out. I should be explaining to kids what is happening as they turn the coarse adjustment knob, for example. This is something I want to stay aware of throughout the rest of the year in an attempt to improve my demonstration skills.
I guess overall, I am beginning to see instructional design as an intricate dance. There are so many possible steps and missteps, but the designer has to know the dancers before anything can be choreographed. Then, a careful balance must be created between the dancers skills and the steps, or the recital will be a disaster for both the dancers and the choreographer. Hmmm...I think I've been taking my daughter to too many ballet classes...
Learning Blog #1
When studying to be a teacher, you learn many things. You learn that people think and learn differently. You also learn that there are many creative ways to teach, that will be much more effective than traditional methods. These first few chapters have touched upon that knowledge. They describe the many ways of learning and also state that you cannot rely on just one. I truly respect and believe those things but when I think about my actual everyday teaching, I'm not sure I consider any of this. I'd like to think, that without really stating it, I am incorporating all of these things into my teaching, but I'm not sure. I think that even though education has progressed over time and changed with new knowledge about the human thinking processes, teaching has not changed all that much. Part of that reason is because of the stress they put on advancing the students at such a rapid pace. There is no time in the curriculum to be creative and try something new. There is not time to let the learners learn by their experiences. It is much more of "they need to learn X in one day and Y in three days and then you need to test them". I can't remember the last time I gave my students a project as an assessment. All these things that we should be doing and considering, we are, generally, not. Although I don't speak for everyone in my chosen field, I know there are a few who would agree with me on this subject. I hope now to try to be more mindful when I am planning lessons and to make sure that I am thinking about the way they are learning and the different types of learning. That may make things better for all involved.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Learning Blog #1
What did I learn from the readings. I learned to coin an old phrase that there is more than one way to skin a cat. What I mean by that is that there is more than one approach to learning and instructing. I guess I see myself in the scheme of things as an eclectic. When I am teaching I use a variety of methods to teach a skill. I do agree with the behaviorist B.F Skinner that a learner most be an active participant in the learning process. As an Early Childhood Educator that was a concept, as a undergrad, that reigned true with all learning involving young children. I also like the postmodern approach in that there is more than one answer to a problem instead of just one. I like this for it accounts for all learning styles. When I was instructed in school there was always one correct answer. What questions were raised as I read? My head is just swimming with all the different philosophies and vocabularies that go with each. I guess I want to know is one approach better than the other and are there certain circumstances under which these viewpoints work?
Jen's Journal Blog Post #1
Determining when learning has actually taken place is something I have struggle with through out my teaching career. I always debate if simple memorization is learning. As Merrill stated when you simply memorize something your likely hood of forgetting is increased. The biggest culprit of the memorization versus learning for me is spelling. Every year I have students that score 100% on their spelling test but spell those exact words incorrectly in their everyday writing. The very same student can repeat the given rule for week but does not apply that rule to their own writing. In Bloom's taxonomy knowledge is one of the steps. The student applying the information would be higher up on the level. In my opinion simple memorization is not learning. Students have to own the skill or concept and apply it to new situations or explain their thinking. In my class I try to make students "prove it" or tell "how do you". I tend to agree with the book in that a mixture of learning approaches is important. I think that for various situations that behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism has its place. In science I tend to have a more constructivist approach where I do not in reading. I think that as the teacher you need to know the content and the students your working with and choose the approach that works best for the situation.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
BIllie's Philosophy of Technology
I feel that using technology in the classroom is very important. Technology has become an everyday part of students' lives therefore many connections can be made very easily with them. Students can do research and communicate those ideas with the teacher and each other. They can use their creativity in a variety of ways.
Teaching with Technology
Teaching with technology is, I believe, a necessary today because our students are familiar with the today's technology and are technologically literate. I use technology in my class on a daily basis just to keep the students' interest. Students are always curious to see what you know about technology as well. They are willing to help and also willing to learn.
Philosophy of Teaching with Technology
I enjoy technology in classroom and have experienced that it helps both the instructor as well as the students in learning the concepts. The most important factor in successful use of technology in the classroom is proper integration with the course content. In my previous experiences, I have felt both the positive and negative effects, which basically depended on how the technology was used. I really appreciate use of technology in teaching / learning a concept that is hard to visualize in the classroom or the real world. My first longest exposure to technology in the classroom was when I took a class in Organic Chemistry. The professor who taught this course was blind and used computer-based instructional methods and solid models to help students to understand and visualize the chemical concepts. He also used computational models and simulations in the classroom. After this experience, I felt that as long as technology is used in proper context it is helpful to both the teachers and the students.
Philosophy of Teaching with Technology
My philosophy of teaching with technology is simple: Always find a way to incorporate it into your teaching. I believe the integration of technology is vitally important to address various learning styles, to add some "flavor" into your lessons, and to build confidence in the students that their teacher understands technology.
Jen's Philosophy of Teaching and Technology
I have believe that technology is often used as the "teacher" or the body of knowledge. I do not think this is how computers should be used in instruction. Technology should be a tool that is used to help deliver instruction. When you are having the learner use technology it should be meaningful. The learner should be extending and applying their knowledge by using the given technology. When I used technology in my classroom I do not have my students just simply get on a website and play a game and consider that instruction. Students are making webs, manipulating base ten blocks, or making a comic on comic life. The students are extending or applying thier knowledge on the content that I have directly taught.
Philosophy of Technology
My philosophy of teaching with technology is - the more the better. I just had an Interactive White Board installed in my room, and I am having a blast learning how to use it and dreaming up ways to have my kids use it. I use PowerPoint on a daily basis. I also have 7 computer stations in my rooms that lab groups can use to record data, do graphing, write conclusions, etc. I believe that technology is an invaluable tool in my science content area, especially with so much science equipment becoming computer based (like probes). The more I can help kids use technology and become proficient with it, the better off they will be in the future.
My Philosophy on Technology and Teaching
I believe that if used correctly, technology can really make a positive impact in the learning environment. It gives learners an opportunity to participate in the class on a variety of different levels. Whether they are learning through webinars, or navigating an application while the teacher instructs, technology can make education more accessible, while giving the learner an active role in the learning process. At the same time, instructors cannot simply incorporate technology and assume their class will be terrific. They have to continue developing their lessons and cirriculum to meet the diverse learning needs of their target audience.
Philosophy of Teaching with Technology
In my classroom, I enjoy using technology where it is appropriate and will enhance my instruction. Besides showing the students how to use technology and teaching them with it, I try to teach them how to use various programs and applications. I think kids need to know how to use as much technology as possible because it is increasingly becoming more important in our lives. By the time they reach high school, students will definitely need to know how to write, edit, and format a paper, and this is still pretty challenging to my 7th graders. The more that I can teach them now, the more they will be prepared for the future, which means that I need to keep updated with the latest technologies in order to best teach them.
Philosophy of Teaching Using Technology
The use of technology in teaching is essential for learning today. The more students use technology, the better prepared they will be for high school, college, graduate school, and thier chosen career. I encourage my students to use technology whenever possible as it relates to my class and the projects, lessons, and content we are working on. Proper use of the internet, smart boards, various software programs, and search engines are essential for students to incorporate technology into their learning experiences.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Welcome!
Welcome to the course blog for ISTC 667 - Instructional Design & Development! We'll be using this space to write entries to assigned learning journals (see syllabus for details and due dates). Writing a learning journal is often an individual, isolated activity - and you will in fact be asked to write individual responses to the learning journal prompts. At the same time, collecting these individual journals on this blog allows us to see what thinking and what kinds of issues are collectively being pondered by members of the class community. You are not required to comment on your colleague's posts, but feel free to do so!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)