Instructional Design Development
Before taking up my Rotary Peace Fellowship in August 2019, I undertook an Instructional Design course to enhance my education practice. Here, I share some reflections on that process.
Part One: The ADDIE Model
On the journey to understanding how literacy programmes and courses can be developed in the most impactful way, I am journeying through an instructional design course.
Instructional design refers to the process of developing courses or programmes in a systematic way, using learning specifications (such as type of learner) and learning theories in order to provide the best instruction. It is going to be useful to explore, as I journey into the best way to provide literacy courses to support literacy advancement.
During this programme, I am being introduced to some different instructional design theories. The first, and most well know, is the ADDIE model. This was developed in the 1970s and provides great clarity in its step-by-step approach towards instructional design.
A=Analyse – who is this programme for?
D= Design – start to create the programme – what should it look like? What are the objectives?
D= Develop – begin to build the actual programme. What do the lessons look like?
I= Implement – actually deliver the course. What platform will you use?
E= Evaluate – both formative and summative evaluation.
The evaluation in ADDIE is arguably the most important factor, as it will continue to inform programme development after this initial course is complete. That is what makes the model so effective for designers, as they are always, theoretically, improving their designs for future courses and programmes.
So, that being said, please check out my first ADDIE model here: https://mm.tt/1198935648?t=RC9k8QiyWh
This attempt is for a course to look at the evaluation of a Team Charter in a work environment.
Part Two: Dick and Carey Model
Week three of my instructional design study has led me to the Dick and Carey model (1978). This model highlights the relationship between educational content, context, learning behaviour, and instructional technique.
I have developed a short 3-minute podcast to explain the nine steps of the model with some real examples.
You can download that here.
Part Three: UBD- Understanding By Design
This week I have been exploring the method of working backwards from the overall goal and outcome. The UbD method is relatively simple: set your established goal – what the students will be able to do at the end of the course. From here, you work backwards, considering the assessment criteria and activities and then moving on to the specific activities that make up the course.
The method is praised for supporting the development of critical thinkers and learners that really understand why they are learning. This means the learners are able to develop their own skills too, as they understand why they are doing these activities in order to reach that higher goal.
As part of my study, I created a UbD model of my own. You can check it out here.
I have also had a bit of a reflection on my application of the UbD model this week, specifically considering the context I teach in; Japan. Please check this out here.
Part Four: Rapid e-Learning Models: Pro and Con
With the growth of e-Learning as a viable and pedagogically sound process, so has grown Rapid e-Learning options. These tools allow individuals and small companies to create their e-Learning programmes in a cost-effective and labour time-saving way.
Rapid e-Learning requires careful consideration of the right authoring tool. This is no easy task, as there are many options, with a range of prices and options to consider. One key thing to bear in mind is that if you already use a learning management system (LMS), make sure your authoring tool of choice works with the current LMS. For example, if you currently host your courses on Moodle, there are many headaches in store if you start using an authoring tool that isn’t compatible with Moodle. It just isn’t worth the hassle, as, after all, one main reason for using a Rapid e-Learning system is to be able to develop and deploy rapid e-Learning!
So, what are the pros and cons of Rapid e-Learning systems? Well, they are extremely cost-effective, which allows users with less finical support, but perhaps some awesome ideas, to create content that can reach an audience far and wide. This could be significant for charities for example, who are highly accountable for their costs, but perhaps want to be able to share their e-results sources in some way.
Another pro is that a Rapid e-Learning model allows the content creator, or instructional designer (ID), a great deal of autonomy. When working with a full team to develop content, the ID brings their specific knowledge to the table. However, if working using a Rapid e-Learning model, the team is likely to much smaller as these models negate the need for graphic designers and coders for example. In this way, the ID can have greater input on how the programme looks and how users interact with it.
With pros, there come cons…the major con of Rapid e-Learning programmes is that, like everything in life, if you cut costs, it usually has an effect on quality. This can be seen in these models as the images are all stock images, colours usually fixed and set. This isn’t such an issue if you are creating one or two programmes, however, if you hope to develop a whole back catalogue, it can lead to learner fatigue as each programme will end up looking remarkably similar.
Learner fatigue is a significant issue. After all, if learners can not engage with the programme, it isn’t therefore not going to be an effective e-Learning resource. Online learning needs to keep the learners engaged, as there are so many distractions available to the modern student. E-Learning programme developers can’t rely on learner motivations alone. Therefore, this could be a big barrier to successful Rapid e-Learning models.
A great, simple article I found on Rapid e-Learning can be found here.