Studying Beth Owens' case in this module was a very enjoyable experience for me. It focused on a real obstacle that I face in my own instructional design practices. That obstacle is my own educational philosophy and beliefs about how learning best occurs. Spending time with Owens' case caused me to reflect on instances where I know such stubbornness jeopardized the learning goals of a project or unit of study that I was responsible for teaching. Similarly, I have corrupted the learning experience of my students by adopting a results-only mentality as seen with Chef Reiner.
While there are no clear answers to situations involving educational preferences and whether the process is more important than the outcome, we should always work to be cognizant of such needs. Doing so reflects a learning-focused mindset which, though it will make mistakes, will generally benefit students by enhancing the teaching and learning process.
A strong realization that I had in the course of completing this module is data's ability to help us approach instructional design with objectivity. Though still subject to interpretation, data keeps our instructional design practices grounded and focused on learning and achievement. I once heard an administrator share that he does not care whether or not a teacher feels like Johnny is growing in reading comprehension. He cares about the data that shows that Johnny is growing. This isn't meant to be interpreted as callousness or objectification of students as data points. Rather, it is intended to communicate that the narrative of a student's learning and achievement tells a clearer story when it is quantified and measured instead of supposed from intuition.
As an instructional designer and classroom teacher, I want to welcome research and data on students' learning, growth, and achievement into my professional practice more systematically. Rather than paying attention only to the data that supports my feelings about how students learn or how something should be done, I want to base my beliefs and decisions on what research says is working best for each individual learner. Only then will I be able to design instruction with objectivity toward the most successful teaching and learning practices.
Saturday, April 26, 2014
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Module 6 Reflection
While is it natural to devote much attention to the instructional delivery and production of materials for any given lesson, just as critical to meaningful learning to occur is consideration to motivation. Rather than simply the result of an intrinsic or extrinsic loci of control, there are ways that instructional designers can structure their lessons and learning environments to support student motivation.
John Keller's motivational design activities and ARCs model is a tool, new to me, that offers much value in my continued instructional planning and design. As a complement to effectively structuring curricular content into a comprehensive lesson or unit, Keller emphasizes the need to also include strategic elements of student motivation throughout the sequence of instruction. From definition to design to development to piloting learning activities, Keller proposes a series of subcategories and process questions to guide instructional designers in the process of devising high quality learning experiences.
Looking at my own instructional design project through the lens of Keller's methodology has helped me to further consider the tapestry of a comprehensive and cohesive instructional effort. While I have been giving ample attention to the content and delineation of learning tasks and objectives, I had not yet heavily considered the ramifications of designing elements to support student motivation. I suppose that I was relying on content materials and instructor charisma to provide for that.
Now that I have a better understanding of the ARCs model and Joh Keller's motivational design activities and process questions, I will be able to approach the subsequent planning of this course's project design, along with future endeavors into instructional design and deliver, with a less myopic point of view. Rather, I will approach instructional planning for students in a way that considers the driving forces that engage them in learning, or motivation.
John Keller's motivational design activities and ARCs model is a tool, new to me, that offers much value in my continued instructional planning and design. As a complement to effectively structuring curricular content into a comprehensive lesson or unit, Keller emphasizes the need to also include strategic elements of student motivation throughout the sequence of instruction. From definition to design to development to piloting learning activities, Keller proposes a series of subcategories and process questions to guide instructional designers in the process of devising high quality learning experiences.
Looking at my own instructional design project through the lens of Keller's methodology has helped me to further consider the tapestry of a comprehensive and cohesive instructional effort. While I have been giving ample attention to the content and delineation of learning tasks and objectives, I had not yet heavily considered the ramifications of designing elements to support student motivation. I suppose that I was relying on content materials and instructor charisma to provide for that.
Now that I have a better understanding of the ARCs model and Joh Keller's motivational design activities and process questions, I will be able to approach the subsequent planning of this course's project design, along with future endeavors into instructional design and deliver, with a less myopic point of view. Rather, I will approach instructional planning for students in a way that considers the driving forces that engage them in learning, or motivation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)