EDER
673 – INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
Graduate
Division of Educational Research
Faculty of
Education
University of
Calgary
Instructional
Design Model
Assignment #3
Submitted
to:
Elizabeth Childs
Professor EDER
673
Submitted by:
Dawn Hayward
237521
December 9, 2000
Table
of Contents
Introduction - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - 3
Journal - - - - - -- -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5
Phase One of Instructional Model
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -11
Phase Two of Instructional Model
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -12
Phase Three of Instructional Model
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -13
Summary of Revisions
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -14
Rationale for Model
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -15
Introduction
The
outline of this final assignment reflects the journey from a novice
instructional designer … to a novice instructional designer who has the
tools to embark on a new direction for educational instruction.
I have decided to submit my record of conversations and my journal for
the course as the first elements of reading.
These elements reflect my excursion from the initial questions about ID
and into a philosophy about my role as an instructional design
The
three iterations of instructional models are presented with bulleted
descriptions of the diagram to walk the reader through its steps.
The summary of revisions are offered to describe modifications between
the models and explain the significance of each alteration in relation to my
understanding of ID. Finally, the
rationale is the explanation of each model, the pieces involved and why they
link to specific sections. I felt
it necessary to discuss the view I had, at the time of each model’s
development, about how instructional design has affected my career as a
teacher. It is evident that as my concept of instructional design changed, so
too did my model.
Journal: A Journey Through
the Adventure of Instructional Design
The
Final Assignment
In revising the contents for my final assignment, I have
returned to this journal to assist in the modification of my models and to
edit for submission. I question
myself as to whether I have addressed the issues and topics that served
purpose for the assignment of this journal.
Throughout my university curriculum, I have kept mini journals that are
invaluable to me during a course. When
I read “journal” on the course outline I went to work discussing where I
had problems, ideas about topics, and anything else that might have come to
mind. Since rereading I have
noticed that direct mentions to the final assignment and to my design models
are rare. I was thinking about
editing the content to directly address these topics.
My rationale does however, focus on the models and I have decided to
leave the journal as it is. This
note is to explain that although there may not be frequent mention of my
models, this journal was a valuable asset in revising and explaining each of
the three.
Ideologies
I have found it difficult to
read this article (Curriculum Ideologies, Elliot W. Eisner), as I cannot
relate it to anything I have read before.
It will be difficult to do a critical analysis of the articles when I
usually read material that supports a professor’s opinion.
Reading an article to form my own opinion is a new experience for me.
How will my curricular ideology shape the development of my
instructional design model? I
think it is much to early in the semester to contemplate that one!
Curriculum Ideologies
Continued … Posting discussions in this type of forum is going to be much
more difficult than I originally anticipated!
Completing a course on-line seemed like an excellent means to study, as
you do not need to see your classmates face to face. I thought this would be a liberating and I would feel
comfortable saying anything I felt … I was wrong!
It is intimidating posting my discussion because it is not a spur of
the moment thought. In the
classroom format a discussion is a discussion, the class works from point A to
point B to point C together. This
type of communication jumps from point A (where we all read the articles) to
point C (where we post an analysis). You
completely miss the journey to understanding.
My first posting should have been saved for this journal! I didn’t realize what was involved. I wrote, as I would have spoken in the classroom, talking
through my understanding and not stating any real conclusion. I feel now like it wasn’t the right way to discuss!
From now on I am going to deliberate a lot more before I post.
I think I’m going to miss talking to classmates and learning how they
make their journey through to understanding!
Instructional
Design
WHAT EXACTLY IS INSTRUCTIONAL
DESIGN???? I have read the
definitions, researched websites, read my articles and I still don’t feel
confident in my role as an instructional designer!
This is probably occurring because a lot of the material described is
outside my realm of experience. I
know what a learner analysis entails and will consider my learners in planning
a lesson however; the detail described here is a lot more intense than
anything I have ever done. I feel
the need to relate each new topic into my experience as a teacher without
losing important information that will assist me as an instructional designer! I’m supposed to have an initial phase of my model of
instructional design for the final assignment and it would look nothing like
those in Chapter Two (Mastering the Possibilities). I’m not even aware that I design activities based on a
model, simply that which I followed at MUN (Memorial University of
Newfoundland). My temptation is
to choose the model, which is closest to my experiences thus far, and to see
how it adapts as I discover new understanding throughout the course.
Analysis:
Learner and Context
Like I said before, this stuff
is way out of my league … but … I am beginning to see a great relevance!
I cannot take this material as is, and use it in my teaching everyday
… however… I am having some of those “a-ha” moments as I read!
Particularly relevant was the article Instructional Analysis: analyzing
the learners. I stated before
that I found the readings on learner analysis much more in-depth than I was
used to, however I am now realizing that I have never paid it the attention it
deserved. As a primary/elementary
teacher, I have the same learners day in and day out.
After an initial analysis into my students, I often make assumptions
throughout the year based on that research and changes I have observed in the
children. It seemed a bit much
(and to some extent still does) to analyze the learners in as much detail for
each and every lesson I develop. What
I can do with this information is to complete an in-depth analysis
understanding what to look for and keep track of these characteristics at
specific checkpoints throughout the year.
It was so useful to have these characteristics definitively labeled and
I also had the opportunity to learn something about myself … I have always
had a low academic self-concept! (Something I can now work on throughout this
course).
Needs
Analysis
Needs assessment has been
crucial to me as a teacher since I first began in a primary classroom. Determining the gaps between what is and what should be is
usually the first step I take after analyzing the objectives (a topic to be
discussed later). I enjoyed the
reading immensely as it broke down and defined a topic that I thought I knew a
lot about. That has been a
consistent experience for me in this course.
I was somewhat familiar with many of the topics to be studied
throughout the semester but as I read I am discovering assumptions I make,
what I take for granted, and areas that were a little grey and that I didn’t
completely understand. For
example, sampling procedures and data collection, it was refreshing to have
these topics broken down and even though the material was familiar as I was
reading I was thinking, “Yes, yes that’s it!
That’s what I mean!”
Analysis:
Task and Content
Interesting!
Never thought of classifying content as an effective means of helping
to design instruction. As Elizabeth stated in Backpack Essentials, “they wonder
about the application of content analysis to teaching, so it is worthwhile
taking time to analyze various types of familiar content using this
approach”. Time to start
thinking seriously about my first design model.
The Dick and Carey model pops up again and again in the text, readings
and on sites I have researched. My
first instinct is to adapt it as my own and follow it to a T.
This would be a nice security blanket to follow!
However some of the boxes wouldn’t apply to my day-to-day teaching.
I don’t have to write objectives for my students although it is
sometimes necessary to adapt them to meet specific needs.
Again the learner and context analysis would not take up an equal box
each and every time I designed instruction.
What is very, very interesting to note is the revision phase of the
design. In the model it occurs
throughout the planning and design. I
do change my design during development when things seem unfeasible.
It is rarely a conscious effort to go back into the design during
planning. My revision usually occurs during implementation when things are not
working out or I need to adapt to the learners.
If I put more emphasis on the revision phase during the design of
instruction, would it be necessary to adapt during implementation as much as I
currently do?
Audio-conference
#2
This was a
revelation! Since the beginning of this course, I have felt insecure
about my ideas and tentatively wrote discussions each week. I assumed I was the only person in the course who was
struggling with the idea that I didn’t belong with the group. We began the conference by breaking into small groups to
discuss what was going well with the course in addition to changes we felt
needed to be made. In my group,
the others admitted that they also feel overwhelmed by the amount that people
were writing and the detail and research that seemed to make up each posting.
It was reassuring to know that it wasn’t just me who read this stuff
and thought “WHAT?” Great conference! I
miss the interaction from a classroom setting.
I also e-mailed Michelle to give her the notes from the conference
and when she wrote back she said she had been
feeling the same way. I think
everyone feels better and a lot more confident now that we know where we
stand.
Objectives,
Consistency, Difficulty, Critically and Evaluation
Where do I start on the topic of objectives????
I remember being in professional year when we would design a unit of
instruction for a course. The sky
was the limit! There were zero
boundaries and we could plan for a utopian classroom with unlimited resources
and talent! Basically it was a
case of choosing an interesting topic, letting the activities flow from there
and finally plugging objectives into what we had already designed!
In fact, because there were no limitations put on the assignments, a
learner analysis wasn’t necessary since we could assume all the students
were of equal cognitive ability. When
I began to teach I switched my tune! My
first step was the objectives. I
devoured objectives and knew them inside and out. It was obvious that the activities should stem from the
objectives. The problem here was
that they weren’t very interesting and didn’t take the learners into
account. Anyway, I digress! The interesting topic from these readings was the objectives.
I had the opportunity to develop educational programs for the
Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation last year and one of the first
steps was the development of objectives.
I did a pretty good job, in fact at the time I thought I did a great
job. Now, I want to go back to
work and resubmit the programs again with better objectives.
Again this is a case of having information that I already know, being
so clearly defined that I feel that maybe I didn’t know as much as I had
thought!
Sequencing
and Blueprinting
I
have never done a content analysis grid before.
The backgrounder information section states, “This tool allows you
and your subject matter expert(s) to review the content going into the
lesson/training and establish levels of criticality, difficulty and
prerequisite skill” Until my position for Tourism, I had never designed
instruction for someone else to implement who would be considered a “subject
matter expert”. Obviously as
teachers, teamwork and sharing is an integral part of the job.
The difference exists because my co-workers are in the same field.
We make the same assumptions, and skip the same steps.
Using blueprinting and sequencing would have been an amazing asset to
the interpreters who are now using my history programs in the schools.
Working with the history “experts” was the hardest part of the
position. When we would discuss a
program, they thrived on the discussion of content; it was the learning
activities that caused problems!
Media
Selection
In
the text under “Your Personal Learning” it asks, “How do media help you
learn?” In my circumstance
right now? … Alot! Considering
the fact that I am doing a degree in Educational Technology?
I’m all for media (as long as I can get a job! Hee Hee) Really though, our school has fantastic resources as
far as instructional media is concerned.
In fact, our Principal has a diploma in instructional media.
He lends himself across the staff as an essential resource in media
selection and use. The question
that threw me for a loop is “Where is your instructional model are
instructional media decisions made?” That is an excellent question!
Somewhere in the planning … maybe mixed in with the needs, learner,
and content analysis. Pretty
broad … this requires some thought.
Audio-conference
#3
The blueprint assignment is
due on Monday and it seems to be on alot of people’s minds.
I was feeling confident about my assignment (a parent workshop on
helping high school students choose careers) since we are running this program
now and I could use alot of familiar material.
I have now decided that it is quite hard to manipulate previously
prepared and delivered information and make it fit a specific pattern.
As a mini-test I used a rough blueprint format to develop my next few
computer science lessons. It was
a challenging (and time consuming) but worthwhile experience.
I think it better to develop new material using the blueprint format.
Instructional
and Idea Trends
The article on Team Activities for Learning and Performance was great!
I actually used the “Elephant Grope” this week in a Social Studies
lesson on the UN. It went well
but not as perfect as described in the piece (surprise).
When I first read the title of the article I thought I would be reading
about teamwork in the professional setting.
I have four colleagues on my staff that I work with closely.
It is somewhat a team teaching approach and throughout the course I
have been thinking about where the issue would fit into instructional design.
Can four people work together equally to produce a large unit of
instruction? Traditionally we
meet and brainstorm the next block of curriculum.
We bring the objectives and materials to the table and have a great
discussion. Since beginning this
course I have been trying to introduce ID elements and the reception has not
been great. There had always been
a discussion about learner needs and specific students with special needs that
need to be addressed. An in-depth
learner analysis, which encompasses whether or not the material is appropriate
for the learners, has not been part of the dialogue.
I pointed out that we have been choosing the material and deciding how
the learners with special needs fit as opposed to deciding the relevance to
the types of learners we have in our classes.
Again something to think about as I try to make connections between
Instructional Design, and my everyday experiences as a classroom teacher.
When I say make connections I don’t mean that I discount information
that is not relevant to me right now, instead I am taking what is useful to me
and applying it and processing the rest for future use… I miss the days of
memorizing the readings and spitting it back out in a paper … reflection is
easier said than done!
Problem Based
Learning
I enjoy the use of
drama/problem learning in my classroom. The
students usually feel reluctant and embarrassed at the beginning of the unit,
but they soon forget the “acting” part of it and enjoy the experience.
I don’t usually enjoy addressing a large number of objectives in a
lesson. That can occur when
people just want to write something down, or prove that their classrooms are
providing a proficient educational environment.
It is truly amazing, however, how many objectives are addressed, across
the curriculum, with a drama/problem-solving unit!
Learning through problem solving is the greatest way to relate learning
to reality since the students are living the problem at the time. They also have a vested interest in deciphering the
challenge. The trial to this type
of instruction is the experience and training of the instructor.
It is essential that the teacher/leader have a well-planned lesson
developed. When learners have
been set out to solve a problem it becomes difficult to control where they may
wander (usually away from the objectives).
Extension and further learning is great, but an instructor must ensure
that the goals are attained. This
is where some teachers get nervous. They
don’t have the skills to “manipulate” the drama to bring it around to
the point where it should be. Perhaps
this is why problem-based learning has been slow in becoming a major factor in
corporate instructional design.
Motivation
Motivating high school student
this area was not adequately addressed in my professional year.
I was told once that classroom management and motivation are not
teachable … you just have to do it! My
classmates would disagree! During
my time as a substitute teacher I had the opportunity to work with students
from K-12 and tourism allowed me to work with adults.
Motivation was a factor across the board. Enthusiasm and confidence were themes I tried hard to work
on. When I got a call at six in
the morning to teach grade eleven physics (keep in mind I was trained as a
primary teacher) I found it difficult to muster the enthusiasm necessary to
keep students involved, let alone the confidence to pull it off.
How would that be addressed in the instructional design setting?
I’m hired at a plumbing company.
I know zip about toilets, pipes, etc.
There are content experts to help me with that aspect of it, but how do
I motivate learners when I am not enthusiastic about plumbing.
This is not a major issue in my career today because I love each and
every subject I teach. I know
this shines through and gives me a head start in the area of motivation (the
rest I just have to go do it … hee hee).
Job Aids and
Message Design
Last topic! Haven’t seen anything in Backpack Essentials as of yet but
I did find the articles interesting. Job
aids are extremely useful tools that I have used my entire University career
for studying. The article on
Kiosk design and Perception Principles were fascinating and deserve attention
during the instructional design process.
The font and layout rules offered by the Kiosk article are helpful when
laying out papers, overheads, and letters sent to parents.
They were fairly long articles to simply give the point that designers
need to be aware of how visuals are received by the learner to ensure the
layout is effectively presented. Alot
to do in the past few weeks. This
week was our final summary. I
wanted to get it out of the way as early as possible and hang on to it until
later in the week for posting. Lorna
said to go ahead and post it before Thursday in case we were told that a
summary would not be necessary and our work would be wasted.
It felt great to send of both the summary and the glossary of terms.
The final project is winding down.
I have reread this journal and can’t decide if it’s correct.
There are not a lot of direct mentions of my instructional design
model. It has been a useful tool
when it was time to examine my revisions as I could determine where I was at
the time and what I was thinking. For
me it has been an invaluable means of helping me grapple with the issues of
the course. I enjoy keeping a
journal to keep my thoughts straight. It
has somehow replaced the discussions that are normally held in class!
Audio-conference
#4
I really enjoyed our
discussion tonight. It is
extremely isolating living in Newfoundland and attending a university where it
is impossible to drop in when problems arise.
I don’t even know who to call when my student loan is messed up, when
I need to be considered a full-time student, when I don’t have my insurance
card etc. A lack of human contact
makes me dependent on others (namely Lisa Russell).
It’s gotten to the point where I feel horrible calling and
interrupting her once again! Learning
the expectations for the final project was great!
Human contact helps alot, much better than reading a piece of paper.
I have thoroughly enjoyed this
course (I’m not just saying that as I am being graded on this assignment).
It has affected my view of myself as a designer.
I once did a workshop on the roles of classroom teachers: teacher as
parent, teacher as organizer, teacher as administrator, etc.
I now feel I can add teacher as designer into the mixture.
It is great to finish a course and have a changed perception of myself
and of my role as a teacher!
Summary of Revisions
As the explanation of
revisions will be included in the rationale, this will be a simple description
of the revisions that occurred between the three phases of my design model.
The initial model included a
placement for theme/topic choice as I was following a traditional model for
lesson plan development. It is
not included in the revised model because it is an area that can be addressed
during the instructional development. The decision to place theme in the development section, stems
from the realization of priorities in designing instruction.
Where once the topic or theme was among the first items considered, in
the revised model, learners are analyzed as well as the needs for instruction
and the topic is decided based on the output of this analysis.
The first model did not
include a needs analysis as I felt it was being addressed in the choice of
objectives. My first priority was
the objectives and the needs for the unit was the attainment of them.
I did not have a clear understanding of the term needs assessment and
now that I do, feel that some of the basic concepts were being addressed but
not in a formal manner. The
second model does include needs assessment in conjunction with the learner
analysis as I felt it unnecessary to separate the two (see rationale for
explanation).
The development of instruction
stands alone in the original model. Although
I did consider media and resource selection in the first iteration, it is not
accounted for in the model. The
decision to factor in the resources stems from an understanding of the
importance of media, and a desire to demonstrate that importance through
inclusion in the model.
Motivation is another area
that is not directly introduced in the original model.
Again it is an section that I did indeed address during instruction,
but not formally in my representation. In
the revised edition, I felt it important to relate the motivation back to the
learner and on into the implementation.
Content analysis is the final
stage which is included in the second iteration but not in the first.
I did not understand the role and thus importance of content analysis
prior to this course and that ignorance is reflected in the original model.
Revisions occurring between
the second and third model begin with the inclusion of instructional goals in
the final phase. I initially
believed the goal of instruction to be the attainment of learning objectives
only, but now understand that my personal goals for the unit can be placed
into the instructional design model as well.
The front-end analysis stage
of the diagram has also been adapted for the third and final iteration.
Again, a lack of understanding about these areas reflects in their
omittance in the revised edition.
The final model includes development and media selection
but job aids and other media design have been added to address the importance
of these sections. The last
addition to the final design is program evaluation.
This stage is included due to an understanding of the relevance of
evaluating a program’s effectiveness before implementation as opposed to
afterwards, as detailed in the previous models.
Rationale
As a
primary/elementary schoolteacher, I have struggled with a great deal of the
information offered in this course and it’s relevance to my everyday
classroom. In an attempt to
modify my preconceived notions about design, I adopted a traditional type of
instructional design model for my second phase as opposed to the K-12 lesson
plan model I had previously utilized. Proceeding
thorough the semester, reading articles and related sites, as well as
discussions with classmates and others in the industry, I have developed a
model which encompasses instructional design elements as well as essentials
traditionally found for a K-12 educational setting.
My first model will attest to the limited instructional
preparation experience that characterizes many teacher-education programs.
The focus is on the activities and their implementation as opposed to
the entire design of the work. In
fact, I had trouble identifying myself as an instructional designer when the
course first began. Throughout
the semester I have learned to distinguish the role of a corporate
instructional designer with that of a teacher and the types of
responsibilities and designs that stem from the position.
As the elements of instructional design were revealed throughout the
course, I could relate more and more to the role of instructional designers. I now consider myself truly an instructional designer in an
educational setting.
Phase One
The model presented in phase one reflects my design
choices upon completion of my bachelor’s degree and into my first
experiences designing instruction in the K-12 setting.
The outline presented flows across the page in a horizontal manner.
This straight arrangement mirrors the step-by-step manner that
characterized my design at the time. I
was strongly influenced by the Professional Year offered by Memorial
University and the instructional methods endorsed by the faculty.
It was a linear approach that encouraged revisions during and after
instruction but very little through the design stage.
The first
stage of the model involves a review of prescribed objectives.
These outcomes are stated and only revised by the special planning team
in cases of special needs. In
choosing objectives to be addressed, a topic or theme for the instruction was
usually chosen to tie the activities together.
The theme would need to directly relate to the objectives and the
learners. There would be much discussion as to whether the theme could
grasp and hold the learners attention and if it related to their
characteristics. Since it is my
role as a teacher to ensure that students achieve prescribed objectives in a
specific time, I felt first step in the model should be a review of the
objectives.
The topic of writing objectives in Backpack Essentials
seemed, at first, unrelated to my position in a high school.
I soon realized that it is essential to be able to recognize and
categorize objectives according to specific criteria.
Such skills help in the development of appropriate instruction as well
as effective assessment tools. My
second and third models account for this change in direction.
When trying to identify areas that would be modified
throughout the phases, I could not envision objectives as being a possibility.
Needing to assist students in objective attainment will be forever the
most important aspect of my job. However,
the way I perceive and approach the objectives is something addressed
throughout this assignment.
The learner analysis addressed throughout the readings
was quite foreign to me. I always
consider the student in my choices of design but not to the extent illustrated
in the articles. It did give me
an opportunity to see problems in the deliberation I had given my students up
to that point. Having the same
learners throughout the year can impede a teacher as instructional designer in
the area of learner analysis. An
initial study of the learner will occur but that information can often be
filed and left untouched. A
teacher obviously knows which students excel, which struggle, which may pose
discipline issues, etc. These
concerns are addressed during lesson design but it is too often through
instinct and not a formulated method. This
is where my initial model differs from the other phases.
My contemplation of the learners was certainly there and well intended,
but often not established formally.
The instructional development stage of the initial model
includes the output from the objectives and learner analysis.
There is an element built into the design, which ensures the designer
verifies that the instructional methods do indeed meet the prescribed
objectives chosen for the unit. Note
the lack of evaluation at this stage in the design model.
The evaluation of a program was an area that I considered after
implementation during the assessment of the learners.
Only after the program has run can you determine its success, that is,
did the learners meet the objectives? As
my understanding of the importance and necessity of program evaluation
changed, so too did my model of instructional design.
The revision box situated above instruction
implementation reflects the modifications made by teachers during instruction. Again, I now realize that some of these modifications could
be prevented through an effective program instruction. This insight is represented in later models.
Phase
Two
For
my second model, four weeks into the course, I wanted to get away from the
traditional K-12 lesson plan model. Many
of the elements of instructional design discussed during the course related to
my everyday teaching and I felt their inclusion would benefit my instructional
model. I did not, however, have
the confidence to create my own design and began the search for an existing
model that would meet my needs. The
Gerlach and Ely model was described as one “for a teacher who is a novice
designer”. In researching the
Gerlach and Ely model, I discovered that it was appropriate to my reality as
it is a prescriptive and procedural model.
These are elements that I think important to an instructional design
model for a classroom teacher. A
descriptive model may not account for modifications that can occur situation
to situation whereas a prescriptive orientation describes how the learning
environment can change. The
Gerlach and Ely model is also appropriate for a K-12 environment as it
utilizes a small-scale design, that is, units, modules, or lessons.
Although reliance on a specific model would be
comforting, I did not think all the elements included in the Gerlach and Ely
model coincided with my experiences designing for a K-12 classroom (it would
also defeat the purpose of this assignment to use the work of others!)
Again, the revised model begins with an examination and
choice of learning objectives appropriate to the grade level and subject area. An examination of analysis is next in the design as the
course was accounting for these stages, which I felt, warranted inclusion in
the model. However, the needs
assessment phase discussed in the readings seemed overwhelming and much to
detailed for a classroom setting. I
did not feel this should be an excuse to disregard the importance of front-end
analysis and instead modified the existing literature to meet my own design
needs. I decided the model should
consider analysis (learner and needs) at the same stage of the model and use
the output to help make instructional design decisions.
This model
sees the inclusion of media and resource selection with the development of
instructional activities. In the
initial model I did, of course, factor resource selection into the design
however, it is not formally represented in the model. This time, I felt it important to include the area to stress
the importance of this stage to the learner’s acquisition of the learning
outcomes.
Motivation is built into this section of the model as
well. Again, an area that was represented informally previously,
but now is included in the design. This
inclusion is a reminder to myself, as designer, to properly account for
learner motivation in the design of instruction.
This motivation is linked back to the needs and learner analysis as
well as ahead to instructional implementation.
The decision to analyze the content after the instruction
is developed stemmed from a desire to give it a final once over before
implementation. It provides an
opportunity to categorize information in order to assess if the designed
activities will adequately transfer the information to the learners.
It is also an occasion to identify information as critical and/or
difficult and determine if these needs are begin met in the design.
This placement of content analysis provided much thought as I realized
this model does not display a traditional location for the stage.
I felt that to analyze the content before designing activities would
impede the creative flow of ideas. In
this model, the designer uses the instructional development stage as an
opportunity to brainstorm and creatively design as any activities appropriate
to the output of the earlier stages. The
content analysis phase allows the designer to go back thorough this
instruction, analyzing it for relativity to the objectives, need/learner
analysis, and examine for critical and difficult material.
This is the stage to sequence the instruction and determine what to
leave in and what to leave out. This
is a personal model, and after the experience of the blueprint assignment, I
felt it best to analyze content after the development of activities in order
to encourage creative flow.
The implementation and assessment and evaluation stages
relate back to the revision of the instruction.
Only in the assessment and evaluation phase however, is consideration
given to the revamping of the entire design, before that phase, revision is
intended to account only for learning activities.
This accounts for my lack of understanding, at the time, of the
benefits of program evaluation. I
was under the misconception that you could only assess the validity of a unit
of instruction after implementation once it is determined if the learners met
the prescribed learning objectives.
Phase Three
The third and final model of instructional design
accounts for the areas of ID I have discovered throughout the course and my
accommodation of them into my everyday experiences.
I do not suppose to state that this would be the final model in my
teaching career as I realize that it takes experience in design to determine
what is right for me.
This is the
first model that includes a section for instructional goals.
I have realized the benefits of an overview of instruction.
This focus rewards the entire instruction as it prompts the designer to
be influenced by these goals throughout the design of instructional
activities. This is an area that I had disregarded as I believed the goal
of instruction was to help the learner achieve the learning objectives.
Conversations with people in the profession helped me see that teachers
have goals for students in a lesson other than mastery of objectives.
A student will not necessarily master an intended outcome in one class,
does that mean the goal of the lesson was not met?
The answer is no. A
teacher has goals for students other than what the school board or Province
deems important for learners. My
final model accounts for this realization.
The front-end analysis stage now includes environmental
and context analysis as well as the needs and learner from previous phases. This inclusion illustrates my understanding and awareness of
the importance of these topics to my learner’s attainment of instructional
goals. These analyses will be
considered together, yet separately and the output of all affects ID decisions
later in the model. I feel that
the four block arrangement of the front-end analysis adequately represents the
importance of these stages yet accounts for the restricted detail put into the
analyzes as opposed to that described in the readings.
Motivation stems directly from the front-end analysis and
is deposited into the development phase of the model.
This section sees the inclusion of job aids as well as the development
and media selection found in earlier model editions.
The content analysis again flows from the development
section leading into program evaluation.
The other models included evaluation occurring after design was
implemented. A major question I would ask was, did the instruction help the learners meet
the intended objectives? I have
realized now that I could have avoided many failures by instead asking, will
the instruction help the learners meet instructional goals?
This is why program evaluation now fits into my model.
I can make decisions about the effectiveness of my instruction before
implementation and predict a greater chance of success.
Implementation and Assessment are the final stages of my
model, which link to revisions to the developmental stage of the design and
determine future use of the instructional unit.
Sources
These
sites reflect the traditional type of planning that characterizes my initial
design model.
http://www.witchvox.com/basics/teachers5.html
http://www.lessonplanspage.com/WriteLessonPlan.htm
This site determined my choice in the Gerlach and
Ely Model of instructional design.
http://www.seas.gwu.edu/student/sbraxton/ISD/id_models.html
Other references which assisted me throughout this assignment..
Seels, B. and
Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making
instructional design decisions, second edition. Upper Saddle River, NF: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Shambaugh,
R. N. and Magliaro, S. G. (1997). Mastering
the possibilities: A process approach to instructional design.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html
http://garnet.acns.fsu.edu/~www6982/index.html
http://coe.sdsu.edu/EDTEC544/Glossary/glossentries.htm
http://www.coedu.usf.edu/inst_tech/resources/design.html
http://soeweb.syr.edu/idde/pages/links.html
