Assignment: In this assignment, I wrote a memo to a hypothetical supervisor recommending for or against the use of Instructional Systems Design based on research.
TO: Director of Curriculum
FROM Rob Campbell, Instructional Technology Facilitator
DATE: September 4, 2016
SUBJECT: Recommendations on use of Instructional Design Model
I am sending this memo to recommend against the use of the Instructional Systems Design model in developing our online and hybrid teaching units. Instead I suggest that additional resources be allocated to supporting the implementation of ISD strategies, and that our use of ISD creates student focuses learning focused on engaging project based, problem solving activities. These recommendations follow the use of the Three Phase Design Model (Sims, R., & Jones, D. 2002, 4-8)as a more team centered approach.
The value in the Instructional Systems Design model lies greatly in the approach to its use. ISD applications vary as presented by researcher, but are largely various interpretations of the ADDIE model. However, the model offered by Dick and Carey is highly linear, at least in its appearance. While there are structures within it to suggest cycling back through for revision, the system offered by experts at Indiana University has nearly constant analysis built in for a more student-centered approach. Continued academic and theoretical development of the ISD process refines and develops these further and will likely continue to do so, particularly considering how new K-12 education is at adapting technology into a student-centered learning tool.
One of the main challenges is the shift from traditional educational models to use of online technologies that offer a more student-centered and individually paced learning process. However, teachers, particularly those slow to adapt to new technologies and how they apply to teaching, are challenged by “too little time or too few skills to maximise the benefits of online learning” (Sims, R, & Jones, D. 2002. 2) When the teachers have traditionally been tasked only with developing their curriculum, now they must additionally learn and employ new technologies for delivery of that curriculum.
The result, as suggested by Gordon and Zemke, is that, implementation is ineffective, focuses more on technology use than the benefits of said use, causes weak instruction, and uses approaches that would not be used by educators if they weren’t required by their schools. I propose that it is also possibly due to poor connection between content and delivery due to most educators newness and lack of training in the technologies used.
In spite of this, there is hope for the use of ISD provided we focus on student learning results, which can improve retention and develop higher order thinking skills.
According to David H. Jonassen, “most psychologists and educators regard problem solving as
the most important learning outcome for life” (63) However, leaning too heavily on a systems approach can often result in instructional environments focused too much on individual skills without offering varied ways of applying those skills in meaningful, real world based situations. Jonassen points out that the problem solving domain is separate from the individual processes used together to solve problems. (64)
While Gagne’s work does support the idea that this requisite skills must be developed effectively enough to apply in higher order thinking (Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V., 25), what is missing is the element of engaging assignments in which students are challenged to combine these skills.
My recommendation is to follow the Three Phase Design outlined by Rod Sims and Deborah Jones (2002, 4-8) as it pairs content experts with instructional design and technology teams. Not only does this model take the technology burden off the teachers, but the dialogue between these teams of educators and designers is likely to produce better learning by our students.
References:
Jonassen, David H. (2000) Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational technology research and development, 48-4, 63-85.
Reser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. Boston, Pearson Education.
Sims, Rod, & Jones, D. (2002). Continuous improvement through shared understanding: reconceptualising instructional design for online learning. Deakin University, Australia.
Responses from classmates:
- "While reading the Gordon and Zemke article I also agreed with the fact that "implementation is ineffective, focuses more on technology use than the benefits of said use, causes weak instruction, and uses approaches that would not be used by educators if they weren’t required by their schools." One of my goals in the MIST program is to change that and have teachers use technology in a way that does actually benefit the students. With the CAASP tests we really are requiring our students to think in a new way that is not systems based and requires a new way of teaching for some teachers who are stuck in the old model. I think the 3 phase model would be one to look into so that teachers don't have to do everything on their own. As a teacher it is very difficult to find the time to complete everything I need to get done and assistance with creating curriculum with technology integration would be greatly appreciated."
- "Hey Bob, I’m not gonna lie, at first I was a little hesitant to read your memo based on the length of it. But your writing kept me engaged and I’m glad I read this. You really have a solid grasp on this week’s readings and you made a point to highlight that in your memo. I was particularly draw to the way you structured paragraph two. You clearly addressed all the options, reassured that the theories will always be developing and gave hope that someday K-12 will be up to speed. Quoting Sims, R, & Jones, D. (2002) and addressing the challenge of dealing with instructors that are not particularly tech savvy. Set the stage for your recommendation of the Three Phase model. My memo was addressing the higher ed. world and I completely over looked these point in both the reading and my writing. I’m glad I saw them applied in your memo. Overall well thought-out and solid execution."