The basic ideas of instructional design are not necessarily intuitive, even to an experienced teacher. The challenge in this instructional task, as in any other, is not merely answering the question of “How do we impart the knowledge?” There are a lot of questions that all need answering at the same time, and frequently we need the answers to some before we can get answers to others, but we go into cog-lock because we can’t know the answers to *those* questions until we get the answers to *these* and it cascades.
So we’re reduced to an iterative approach – a kind of gestalt mindset – that prompts us to try to answer all the questions at once, adjusting the answers on subsequent passes. Here are some of the questions we need answers to (in no particular order):
- What do we want the learners to learn?
- What do they know already?
- How will we communicate with them?
- How will they communicate with us?
- How will they communicate with each other?
- How much time do we have?
- What tools do we have?
- How will we know if they learned it?
- How can we make it better the next time we try to teach?
For many classroom based teachers, a lot of the answers to these questions are already cast in stone. For others, the world is more flexible. In a lot of cases, the answers are not known, or mis-understood. The “what do they already know” question in particular is often reduced to “Have they taken the prerequisite class?” Any teacher who starts up a class with such a prerequisite requirement knows the futility of building on an assumed foundation. Even in the best of well-regulated learning environments, students outnumber scholars, and those who learned enough to pass the test are ill prepared to use that knowledge once the final grade has been assigned.
With that in mind, we’ll be spending a week or so back filling, laying down a substrate of river gravel for drainage and working toward an even foundation for us to use going forward. Some of you will pour concrete. Others might drive a stake or two. In the end, we’ll see how many of the structures remain standing when the course is over and you all move in–or move on.
August 24th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
This is great stuff, Nathan – I had forgotten I was subscribed to this blog. You are going to give me lots of good stuff to ponder this semester. I could definitely use some prompts to ponder what my class design is doing well (and not so well), since it’s easy to lose sight of those questions in all the busy-ness of the semester. Thanks for making this blog an open resource!
August 24th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
Hey, Laura! Great to hear from you. I still read Fireside, but don’t post much there any more
This should be an interesting blog to watch this semester as I’m working on three different classes and intend to blog to all of them here.
Students who think they only want to follow one of the courses (like the one they’re taking) should subscribe to the category feed that corresponds to their course number.
August 25th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
As an online teacher for a few years now I have noticed quite a difference in the “student” and the “scholar”. You seem to make a distinction here and I agree. I believe scholars “own their education” and are active participants in it. Even independent, participants in it.
Whereas, “students” are passive in their education and are in some cases containers for acquired information. These “students” have not necessarily become learners as you are defining it here. The containers can easily be emptied once the class is over.
I posted a video on my blog about this issue and the implications of using technology to change learners from students to scholars. I hear a lot of negative comments regarding online classes as “not up to par” etc. I feel this is highly inaccurate and is due to the “gestalt mindset” that assuredly assumes too much regarding passive learning and does not even consider the learner centered learner model.
August 25th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Actually, I think the negative comments are probably quite accurate. There’s a key issue in teaching using computer mediated environments specifically, and that’s that most teachers have no idea how to take advantage of the that environment and as a result they do the things they’re familiar with. The result is a flat, substandard instantiation of correspondence model instruction without a clear understanding of what that model really entails.
I’m going to go watch that vid now
August 29th, 2010 at 3:09 pm
An online class is what the designer wants to make it. I enjoy taking online classes as a graduate student. The knowledge that I obtain only strengthens my instructional designing skills. Online learning has came a long distance since I began working with online courses in 2000. I have experiences several course management systems that assist instructors in developing their course content. The tools are available but many select not to use them. A course module is a blank canvas. The expertise of the designer will bring forth a more advanced design. Some may still prefer painting by numbers which will bring forth the negative comments. Instructional design is what we make it.