Farewell, EDU 658

This post is part of an assignment for Instructional Design: Application. The idea is to reflect upon this whirlwind of a summer session addressing some questions posed by the instructor. Since this course had me thinking about backwards design, I’ll begin by telling you that I created a blueprint for a course I am designing on teaching faculty to teach online. After that I developed two modules, a syllabus, and reviewed the work of my classmates. Now I’ll tell you how those tasks were accomplished.

THE BLUEPRINT

 

image credit: http://tinyurl.com/nk52uhg

The blueprint served as a planning document for designing and developing my course. It was probably one of the most difficult things I’ve ever done. I’m one of those people who when asked to create an outline for my papers, would write the paper then create the outline. It’s very hard for me to create the road map, then use it to travel when I really just want to forge ahead and create the map of the path I took! This being said, my products were fairly closely aligned to my blueprint. I found myself adding extra exercises and other activities to my modules, that weren’t in my blueprint in order to clarify a task or to help with transitions. This is the way I’m used to designing. I find that I like to think about the structure of the course, kind of like the frame of the house, before I begin designing, but after that I jump right in creating content, like decorating the house without a detailed plan. What works for me, luckily, is that our wonderful LMS allows me to easily move content around until I’m happy with its final resting place.

THE MODULES

As part of the assignments, we created an orientation module which (as you guessed) oriented students to the course including the layout, design, and expectations. This module included the syllabus and a meet and greet for the students to get to know one another and to form a sense of community. The second module was a content module – in my case how to define, construct, and use a Professional Learning Network. In the creation of these modules I didn’t have the opportunity to play with any new technologies, but I did get to develop activities which used Google Forms and Padlet – two of my favorite tools. I’m looking forward to finishing with the development of this course in the next few weeks and piloting it late this fall.

LESSONS LEARNED

  

image credit: http://tinyurl.com/nfd2w6m  

•  I will edit, edit, and edit some more until the assignment is due. After I turn it in, I will edit some more. This will be a challenge when the course goes “live” and I have to save my edits for the next time it’s offered.
• A course will never be 100% ready to go and that has to be okay.
• Feedback from colleagues is extremely helpful. This isn’t something I just learned, but something I came to consciously appreciate again.
• Gone are the days I complete an assignment just for the grade. If I don’t see the value of an assignment in its current state, I’m not afraid to start a conversation with the instructor about ways to modify it to meet my needs. This didn’t happen in this course, but I’ve had discussions with classmates from this course about other experiences they have had and those solidified my commitment never to do “busy work” again!
•  There are many course design frameworks and guidelines. Some work better than others depending on many factors including time frame, content, and purpose. All should remain in the toolbox and be ready to be pulled out at a moment’s notice.
• Ask to reuse or repurpose content. And don’t forget to credit the source.
• If I did it all again, what would I do differently? I’ve already had many discussions with colleagues and our instructor so this isn’t news to them, but I would take this course again only if it was the full semester. The mini-term timeframe wasn’t conducive to planning an entire course, developing content, reflecting on others’ work, and editing, editing, editing.

Part Two | Chapters Seven and Eight | "Leading 21st Century Schools"

Part II of Leading 21st Century Schools: Harnessing Technology Engagement and Achievement consists of the final four chapters and is focused on considerations for 21st century teaching and learning. This post provides insights and reflection from chapters seven and eight.

image credit: http://bit.ly/1LOc9Af

Chapter seven focused on tools for teaching and learning in k-12 schools. Searchable repositories of digital curriculum such as Curriki and MERLOT were highlighted, as well as the benefits of using Web 2.0 tools and reusable learning objects to replace the standard textbook. Although I grew up anticipating the first day of school when textbooks would be distributed (along with instructions to take them home that night and cover them in brown paper bags) technology advances have made digital learning cost-effective and easier on kids' backs. For example a digital textbook allows for hyperlinked materials making it easier and faster to access up-to-date information even after the textbook has been published. Students can benefit from personalized learning with digital technology instead of everyone following the same textbook at the same pace.

Using Analytics As a Catalyst for Change http://bit.ly/1GVgviu

Chapter eight explored considerations for 21st century school leaders and the need to be prepared for managing constant change. This chapter briefly discussed the flipped classroom and gamification as ways to engage students while encouraging collaboration, discussion, and hands-on experiences. Both of these strategies are on the higher education radar with the flipped classroom almost being old hat and gamification really entering into its own. The authors listed five trends in technology in education and the one that stood out to me concerned open content and learning analytics. Taking a closer look at several Learning Management Systems, learning analytics have become prevalent features and are more robust than they were even three years ago, even if this is looking at data on a smaller scale. EDUCAUSE has dedicated discussions and content to the growing use of learning analytics for assessment, revision of programs, and improving retention and graduation rates.

Part Two | Chapters Five and Six | "Leading 21st Century Schools"

                      image credit: http://bit.ly/1Mrn6Gh

Part II of Leading 21^st Century Schools: Harnessing Technology Engagement and Achievement consists of the final four chapters and is focused on considerations for 21^st century teaching and learning. This post provides insights and reflection from chapters five and six.

Chapter five examined technology planning and the need to be purposeful, collaborative, and strategic when making technology-related decisions. The authors suggested performing a technology audit and offered some considerations when planning for one. Assembling a technology team was an important part of the planning process. I thought about the equivalent here where I work and was able to relate the technology team to a combination of our Center for Teaching and Learning and the faculty Technology Committee. Together they work to ensure the classroom technology is meeting the needs of the faculty. The Information Technology department works with this group as well, but it also responsible for student technology needs.

Tools for teaching were also discussed in this chapter. The authors considered items such as interactive white boards, digital and still video cameras, and MakerSpaces. The latter caught my eye and lead me to think about how these have reached k-12 education. MakerSpaces, whether you call them that or not, have always been part of libraries. With the advent of 3-D printing these spaces which used to consist of arts, crafts, Legos, and more now feature technological components as well. Kids or adults can build small robots, print a model for a school project, and plan the redesign of their house. MakerSpaces are great additions to the k-12 schools as they can be used to inspire creativity, foster inquiry, and develop confidence in the students.

image credit: http://bit.ly/1DeKnWV

Chapter six explored Web 2.0 technologies, which by now are old hat. Web 2.0 has evolved into Web 3.0 which seeks to connect data, concepts, and people. Much like MakerSpaces, Web 2.0 tools promote collaboration, interaction, and creativity. They are mostly free, cloud-based so they can be accessed anywhere from a computer connected to the Internet, and creations are easily shared on social networks, blogs, and websites. These tools have been around for a while now, so the current discussions are not focused on how to use the tool, in other words how to make it work, but how the tool can be used by technology leaders to enhance their teaching, learning, and communication. The bulk of this chapter focused on examples of how k-12 teachers and administrators used things like Twitter, blogs, podcasts, and bookmarking software to teach, learn, and share information. Discussions about the best use of these tools are at the forefront of online education. Because they are readily available and for the most part easy to use, faculty are looking for ways to enhance content and pedagogy with technology.

Part One | Chapters Three and Four | "Leading 21st Century Schools"

Part I of Leading 21st Century Schools: Harnessing Technology Engagement and Achievement consists of the first four chapters and is focused on leading 21st century schools. This post provides insights and reflection from chapters three and four. 

“The more we connect, the more we learn” 

image credit: http://bit.ly/1GZpjaB

Chapter 3 of Leading 21^st Century Schools focused on ways school leaders could use technology for professional development and to enhance communication and collaboration with teachers, parents, and other administrators. In order to gain and share knowledge, the text suggests developing a personal learning network (PLN) to share ideas with other instructors, locate free resources for students, crowd surf for answers to problems, and to keep up-to-date with education news. PLN's can generate a lot of information at one time, so it is important to develop a plan for interacting with your PLN at the same time your are developing it. For more information on building a PLN check out this presentation Lori Reed and I gave at the NC Library Association conference in 2013. 

Schrum and Levin suggest communicating with teachers and parents through websites, blogs, podcasts, social media, and wikis. One of the best things in this chapter is a list of possible blog topics for administrators to share with their constituents. Some of these ideas include keeping a log of the things you are learning as a school leader, showcasing student artwork and creative writing, and posting links to books or articles to encourage conversation (55). At this point in time, it would be difficult to find an administrator who has not heard of these tools listed above -- it is what to do with them that still presents room for education.

Chapter 4 looked at legal, safety, ethical, and curricular considerations for school leaders. Many of the topics discussed did not pertain to me in higher education, so I chose to focus this post on those that are useful to me. Table 4.1 offers fair use of educational materials. As a librarian and educational technologist, I get a number of questions pertaining to fair use so this table may be a useful tool. Here are additional websites to check out on fair use: Purdue University Libraries and Stanford University Libraries.  Another useful piece from this chapter is a chart that helps a student with digital literacy, in this case how to recognize an advocacy webpage. The questions contained in this chart will be useful for creating an information literacy LibGuide on evaluating websites.

Instructional Design and Current Uses: A Tiny and Selective Lit Review

A recent assignment for a course in the MS in Online Teaching and Instructional Design program I’m enrolled in directed students to collaborate on a Google doc to generate a list and a summary of current research articles to examine the implementations of instructional design (ID) models and the implications for online teaching and ID. From this collaborative literature review each learner created an individual blog post to examine trends, implications, and recommendations for instructional design by synthesizing the collection of articles. Because each student only chose 5 current articles on a topic of their interest, we cannot say with any assurance that the trends we see are representative of the body of current ID literature. Instead the trends are reflective of the 31 unique articles selected for this assignment.

Trends

From this review of the literature, the following trends are clear: 1) creativity is being explicitly addressed when it comes to ID and 2) Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles are being used to create and deliver content in the Web 2.0 world, particularly for mobile devices.

1)      Creativity in Instructional Design

image credit: http://tinyurl.com/nuus6bu

Clinton and Hokanson (2012) maintain that unlike other design disciplines, such as fashion and art, the field of ID has yet to formally and intentionally recognize the importance of creativity in ID. Of course, even systems models of ID that are prescriptive such as ADDIE, have opportunities for designers to be creative. However, by being deliberate with discussions about creativity and engaging designers in conversations about it, authors such as Clinton and Hokanson (2012) maintain that there are increased chances that creative ideas will flow into the design process. 

With this in mind, instructional designers might do well to emphasize creativity in their own work by incorporating higher-order thinking skills into their designing. Divergent thinking, insightful problem identification, and evaluative thinking (Clinton & Hokanson, 2012) can advance systematic models such as ADDIE paving a natural way for creativity. Hokanson, Miller, and Hooper (2008) suggest doing just this in an article about evolving ADDIE to inspire innovation by remembering to be student-centered and to use appropriate technology when designing experiences and not get into a rut by following a process.

Other authors address creativity in conjunction with gaming and gamification. It is clear that gaming, gamification, and instructional video are being used to engage students and to deliver and create content (Ibrahim, Callaway, & Bell, 2015; Copp et al., 2014; Frossard, Barajas, & Trifonova, 2012).

Researchers Copp, Fischer, Luo, Moore, and Dikkers (2014) believe that gaming and instructional design go hand in hand. Hokanson, Miller, and Hooper (2008) write about modifying the ADDIE ID model to allow for more innovation or integration. In others words they are suggesting that by incorporating additional designer roles into the ADDIE process, creativity will result.

2)      UDL

image credit: http://tinyurl.com/oeg2x9t

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework that seeks to encourage ID to include multiple means of engagement, representation, and action & expression in the development of teaching and learning experiences. The class review of the literature indicates that UDL is currently being used in the design of content and experiences for online, mobile, and Web 2.0 learners (Tobin, 2014; Elias, 2011; Rao, Edelen-Smith, & Wailehua, 2015). Tobin (2014) and Elias (2011) commented on the accessibility of course content whether on personal computers or mobile devices and how UDL techniques helped to ensure this access. When developing this content for courses Rao, Edelen-Smith, and Wailehua (2015) found that students prefer short weekly assignments rather than fewer larger assignments, depth in instructor feedback, and synchronous class sessions.

Implications and Recommendations for Instructional Designers

Intentionality regarding creativity and instructional design can be beneficial to both designers/instructors and learners. Designers/instructors can benefit from thinking purposefully about the role of creativity in their work. Any level of creativity can infuse energy and passion into a process that can easily become formulaic and automatic. While some may argue that creativity is inherent in ID, studies show that there are varying degrees of its use.

Gaming and gamification of courses or course content seems to be gaining ground as a legitimate ID method. Introducing elements of game-play into the classroom can motivate learners to perform to the best of their abilities by introducing competition, either between classmates or with one's self. Creative ID can build lessons or courses using gaming elements and inspire learners to continue to achieve.

Using the UDL framework in the design of online courses and mobile content, can only be beneficial. By presenting information in different ways that are appealing to the preferred (or perceived) learning styles of students, designers are allowing students to take responsibility for their own learning. Regardless of the medium, creating content and experiences that are accessible to the most number of people is a win-win situation.

References

Clinton, G. & Hokanson, B. (2012). Creativity in the training and practice of instructional designers: the Design/Creativity Loops model. Education Technology Research Development, 60, 111-130.

Copp, S., Fischer, R., Luo, T., Moore, D. & Dikkers, S. (2014). Analyzing commercial video game instructions through the lens of instructional design. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 4(1), 79-90.

Elias, T. (2011). Universal instructional design principles for mobile learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 144-156.

Frossard, F., Barajas, M., & Trifonova, A. (2012). A learner-centered game-design approach: Impacts on teachers' creativity. Digital Education Review, 21, 13-22.

Hokanson, B., Miller, C., & Hooper, S. (2008). Role-based design: A contemporary perspective for innovations in instructional design. TechTrends, 52(6), 36-43.

Ibrahim, M., Callaway, R., & Bell, D. (2014). Optimizing instructional video for preservice teachers in an online technology integration course. American Journal of Distance Education, 28, 60-69.

Rao, K., Edelen-Smith, P., & Wailehua, C. (2015). Universal design for online courses: Applying principles to pedagogy. Open Learning, 30(1), 35-52.

Tobin, T. J. (2014). Increase online student retention with Universal Design for Learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 15(3), 13-24.

Part One | Chapters One and Two | "Leading 21st Century Schools"

Part I of Leading 21^st Century Schools: Harnessing Technology Engagement and Achievement consists of the first four chapters and is focused on leading 21^st century schools. This post provides insights and reflection from chapters one and two.

Like most texts this one started out with an overview of what to expect in subsequent chapters. Basically the goal of the text is to educate the reader on tools for teaching and learning that are familiar to students and teachers but are not used as often or as well as they could be. The authors are quick to point out that just because schools may take strides to make technology ubiquitous that does not necessarily mean that that technology is used effectively. This is true. Equipping each student with an iPad is only half of the job. Teachers must make use of the technology by involving it seamlessly into their instruction. It has never been about the technology; it is about teaching and learning using technology only as one tool in the proverbial tool box.

Early on Schrum and Levin stressed the need to prepare students for jobs that do not yet exist and harnessing technology is one means to this end. I remembered reading a statistic about the different types of jobs that would one day exist and a quick search on Google helped me to find it. According to the book When the Boomers Bail: A Community Economic Survival Guide 80% of the jobs that we will hold in the future don’t even exist yet. That’s crazy! This statistic reinforces Schrum and Levin’s assertion that we need to teach skills and not content. Collaboration, critical thinking, and creating new information are skills that will make our students ready for whatever jobs await them, and technology can help us help them. One way to achieve this is to change the culture of the school by getting buy in from all of the stakeholders. Another strategy is to identify teachers who are using technology in ways that promote these 21^st century skills and empowering them to act as examples and to teach others. Professional development or continuing education opportunities for teachers are essential to this culture shift as well.

In chapter two the authors identified some characteristics of today’s digital natives, they:

·        Tune out lectures;

·        Will read webpages on a topic but won’t read a text book; and

·        Will listen to podcasts while also surfing the Internet and texting.

These are all evident behaviors demonstrated by students in higher education as well as K-12 students. Lectures are not conducive to active learning which has proven time and again to be essential for engagement and deep learning. Text books offer static content that is out of date by the time the books are printed. On the other hand webpages offer dynamic content and allow students to explore beyond what could only be dreamed of in a physical text and encourages students to be curious and creative. Multitasking is also a skill that millennials think they have mastered. Whether this is true or not, what is certain is that they are doing it, so we should attempt to teach them how to be productive. Additionally, Schrum and Levin wrote about teachers who ban cell phone use in their classes and how this prohibits a plethora of opportunities that could be harnessed and used for deliberate teaching and learning. Rather than trying to fight a losing battle with technological devices and ubiquitous access, teachers need to embrace this digital age, model how to use technology productively, responsibly, and advantageously.  

References

Lautman, M. (2011). When the Boomers bail: A community economic survival guide. Albuquerque, NM: Logan Square Press.

Schrum, L., & Levin, B. B. (2015). Leading 21^st century schools: Harnessing technology for engagement and achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

10 rad jobs of the future. Manolith. Retrieved June 16 from https://visual.ly/10-rad-jobs-future/

Comparing Understanding by Design (UbD) and Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT)

Abridged Understanding by Design

Understanding by design is an instructional design method developed by Wiggins and McTighe (1998) which encourages the instructor to begin planning his or her course with the end in mind. Specifically backwards design promotes the formulation of broad learning goals, followed by the articulation of learning outcomes, chased with an assessment plan, ending with the development of content.

RBT Active Verbs   http://bit.ly/1To3w2P

Abridged Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy

Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy is a two-dimensional (types of knowledge and cognitive processes) instructional design tool that helps instructors to formulate meaningful and measurable learning outcomes. There are four types of knowledge including factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. The cognitive processes are on a spectrum with the higher order thinking skills of analyzing, evaluating, and creating on the opposite end of remembering, understanding, and applying.

Critical Assessment of UbD 

UbD forces the instructor to step back and consider the big picture before focusing in on content and delivery. By requiring that the instructor create a broad learning goal and learning outcomes, it is nearly impossible for them to steer off course as they create their assessments and content as long as everything is informed by those established learning outcomes. For some instructors this method of organization and design is essential for establishing and maintaining direction and momentum. Moreover, UbD is the institutional researcher’s dream in that a plan for assessment is built into the structure of the design. A drawback of UbD is that this three-step method is prescriptive; each of the steps has to be following in a particular order when designing a course. This could be problematic in that there is not much freedom for learners to make meaning out of their experiences if those experiences are designed to produce one to three outcomes. Instructors are essentially “teaching to the test” which can make the design feel rigid and make learners less curious over time. This drawback can certainly be avoided with intentionality on the part of the designer, but is worth mentioning. Also lacking from this model is an intentional reflection piece for the learners. Without the built-in reflection piece there could be missed opportunities for learning.

Critical Assessment of RBT

RBT encourages instructors to design outcomes that require students to engage in both lower and higher order thinking skills, but the way the model is designed it does not guarantee this. There is nothing to stop an instructor from creating all of his or her learning outcomes for a unit by requiring the student to remember factual knowledge. To help combat this, instructors who diligently plan their units or courses to encompass all of RBT can take advantage of the RBT table which allows them to plot their learning outcomes by types of knowledge and cognitive processes. This is useful in that it allows instructors to see areas of the taxonomy that they may not be addressing, paying extra attention to the learning outcomes in the blocks representing metacognitive knowledge that requires the learners to practice analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

image credit: http://bitly.com/1To3w2Q

Comparing and Contrasting UbD and RBT

While both of these instructional design processes can stand alone, they are also complementary and work together very well. Both designs focus on teaching and learning skills and opportunities rather than on the specific content. This is important since instructors should be helping students learn to succeed outside of the classroom. Students will certainly find the skills and thought-processes more useful in their lives beyond the classroom than the content they probably have already forgotten. 

The first step in the UbD process is to “identify desired results.” This is achieved through the creation of a course goal or learning outcomes. RBT can serve as a guide for creating these learning outcomes. In this way the two models pair together effectively. RBT can be said to enhance UbD. There are a few differences between these two designs. Backwards design is prescriptive in that learning outcomes are determined at the beginning of the planning process. Whereas RBT is not as stringent when it comes to design. For example, an instructor could build his or her course in a less than pedagogically sound way (choose a textbook, develop tests, etc.) then use RBT to craft the learning outcomes to fit the plan that's already been determined. In this way RBT does not serve as a guiding design principle. Another way these two differ, in my opinion, is in ease of first time use. Presented with the UbD model and the RBT for the first time, I would imagine that UbD would be easier to grasp. The two-dimensional RBT is better understood with examples of outcomes.

Similarities	Differences
Both focus on teaching and learning over content	UbD is more structured than RBT
Both have the creation of learning outcomes at their cores	UbD may be easier to interpret than RBT without examples or background explanations
Both help to clarify what is expected of the learner and of the teacher
Both focus on what a learner can do, think, or make

For more information on UbD and RBT visit this document created by Saint Mary's Press (2011).

References

Topic 3: Developing goals and objectives. Retrieved June 15, 2015 from http://pixel.fhda.edu/id/six_facets.html

Wiggins, G., & McTighe. J. (1998). Understanding by design; chapters 1 and 3 (Expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.