Section 7 New Directions in IDT

In my science classes, my students are often required to learned and manipulate processes that occur in nature.  One such unit that is coming up in my environmental science classes involves natural cycles that exist in the environment, for example, the water cycle (that is the one that most people are familiar with). 

I can take a textual description of this or another cycle and process it in my mind and understand what is going on.  I also spend tens of thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of time studying ecology, human geography, geophysics, environmental and biochemistry, etc. to be able to do that.  Imagine asking a high school student to read the same passage and process the information! 

 I have never tried to teach this unit using textual descriptions alone.  The cycles are too complex to describe using only words.  Diagrams not only allow users to process large amounts of information quickly, but can also give students an image that they can hold in their minds.  There are also animations out there that will guide users through particular cycles.  The diagrams work best if you require students to explain the cycle verbally, i.e. tell someone else what is going on in the cycle, and through writing.  Technology can be helpful in this regard because students would be able to use simulations or animations of the different cycles.  For example, you could follow the water cycle from the perspective of a drop of water.  The simulated movement of the animation would help show the orderly process of going through the cycle and how the different parts are connected.  They can also be tied to interactive exercises that help support retention and application of knowledge.  Viewing animations and participating in interactive activities could be useful for students at the beginning of their exploration of the cycles, before the teacher and students have had a chance to discuss the cycles and their importance to the environment and humans.  They can also be used as supports for information provided by the teacher.  The challenge would come in determining the best time to use the animations and making sure that the information contained within the animations fits within the scope of the lesson you are teaching.  Unless you make your own animations/videos, you will be at the mercy of the original makers as far as the information provided.  Incorporating the animations at an additional tool/instructional object, while using content delivered primarily by the teacher, would alleviate some of these problems.  I ended up reading several of the chapters and drew from them, mostly ch. 29, 30, and 32.

The use of diagrams, animations, and videos are also useful in order to achieve various educational goals (ch. 38) and increase accessibility of information (ch. 36).  They can be used in guided instructional settings, where the teacher formally guides students through the material in a more traditional educational setting, i.e. I talk, use the diagram as a visual aide and the students follow me.  They can also be modified to allow students to explore the information on their own in order to create initial conclusions before formally discussing the content.  That way, the students can create prior knowledge that the teacher can draw from when formally discussing content.  Informal, student-centered discovery and exploration may not be the best methods in terms of acquisition and retention of information but they are ways to allows students to create connections with their own previous knowledge in a way that works best within their particular schema.  Students can work within their developmental, linguistic, physiological, and neurological limitations if allowed develop their own connections to the content being taught, under the guidance of the teacher.  It is true that a child needs close guidance from a teacher, parent, or other adults when learning something brand new.  However, students also need room to flex their newly acquired information in novel ways that more closely mimics real-world applications.  This can also lead to increased student engagement, since the students are developing new knowledge in a way that “works” for them.  Student engagement is a very strong predictor of student success.

Section 6: IDT Positions

This week we continued moving forward by going backward.  We looked at where we are now, where we want to go, and how are we going to get there.  I am a high school science teacher.  This is my 5th year of teaching and my 7th year in education.  Before that, I did a brief stint in graduate school (part 1), first in research for aquatic science, then in education to get my certification.  One of the classes I took was how computers and technology can transform classrooms.  I have been engaged in IDT ever since.  I enrolled in the Educational Technology-Leadership program because of a class I took as an elective for my Master’s in Biology (the cycle continues…) because, it turns out, I am still interested in using computers to transform my classroom.  I have since learned that the computers won’t transform the classroom, but the strategies that I employ to make the most effective use of computers will.

At first look to a time after graduation, I was looking forward to a technology position somewhere at the campus or district level.  I think that is still in my future, but it will be farther down the road once I have gained experience and confidence using technology in my own classroom before I become a leader for my school/district.  I think that would be the best fit, since my interests lie in curriculum design, technology integration, grant writing, and implementation in public education.  I feel that I would do well in this field because I have a passion for IDT in public schools, technical knowledge (IT support, hardware systems, etc.), and some experience using different educational technology tools.  My weaknesses lie in the amount of experience using the tools I have learned about in a real setting.  I don’t have data on how effective I can be using these tools in the classroom.  Part of how I will obtain these skills is by continuing to use my classroom for projects in my different classes.  This will be my starting point but most of my classes are short-term, so I don’t have examples of long-term usage of technology tools.  In order to get that, I have to take a leap of faith that I have internalized what I have been studying and just go for it.  This will also help me troubleshoot problems that come up and present solutions (Man…that sounded like a good rough draft for a cover letter).  

Upon reading the last chapter, I feel that I would most benefit from membership in the following organizations:  American Educational Research Association, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Association for Educational Communications Technology, International Society for Technology in Education, Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education.  I think I would benefit from going one or more of the above listed organizations because they would keep me informed as to advances in IDT, including emerging technologies and new research findings.  I feel my biggest deficit is my lack of experience in designing and implementing IDT in my classroom and membership in those organizations would be one way to fulfill that shortcoming.  The chapters this week have only served to reaffirm my opinion that I will be best served pursuing practical experience in using the skills and concepts that I have been learning during my time in the Educational Technology-Leadership program in order to create a more robust portfolio of work.  

Section 5: Trends & Issues Various Settings

For this first part of this week we need needed to compare and contrast the trends and issues of two contexts.  From business, military, medical education, K-12 education, and post-secondary education, I chose medical education and K-12.  I chose these because (1) I am educator in a public school and (2) medical education is closest to using the teaching methodology that I am most interested in implementing in my own classroom: problem-based learning.  Both contexts recognize the benefits of problem-based learning in order to develop and enhance problem solving skills necessary in the real world and increasing retention of basic content knowledge by making the process more authentic.  Medical education and public education both have proponents that support the use of informational technology in pursuit of these goals and actively try to integrate these resources into their respective programs.  Both have recognized that PBL increases student satisfaction in the learning process.  The differ in their degree of adoption and integration of instructional technology.  The author of chapter 20 admits that there is much more pressure placed on medical professionals, so research into best teaching practices is ongoing and new data tends to be widely adopted quickly.  For example, initial research on PBL in medical education began in the 60’s and was adopted nationwide by the 80’s.  Most medical schools new employ real world clinical case studies and simulated patients that mimic real patients.  In public education, PBL has seen slower integration.  Many programs still rely on “traditional” teaching strategies: teacher lectures, student takes notes.  (Though, elementary programs, especially EC and kinder programs seem to have more widely implemented inquiry-based methods.  Inquiry-based learning is fundamentally similar to PBL).  Both articles cite research that suggest that technology integration can lead to increases in best practice activities and student satisfaction with learning.  The medical education article, for me, sets a goal to reach in my classroom.  Medical educators set the “gold standard” for how technology can be used effectively in the classroom and the gains that can be had.  

For the second part of this week’s post, I chose chapter 23, Developing Learning to Meet Complex Challenges for an Undivided World, about a theoretical physicist-turned-instructional designer in sub-Saharan Africa.  I learned that learning can take place anywhere, as long as you have motivation to teach, motivation to learn, and imagination to use what you have available.  The students discussed in this chapter did not have computers to pine after or the newest probeware to complain about not having.  Many of those schools did not even have electricity, but the best schools had teachers that wanted to do the best they could for their students.  I think keeping that in mind will help to overcome most any challenge that I would face as an educator.  Unfortunately, I don’t think that the state of our education system is such that our students would have the skills to interact with students from other cultures and regions without pissing people off.  We have, in some cases, tremendous access to technology for classroom use, but we don’t use it to the fullest extent possible.  I consider myself and the forefront of using technology at my school but there is so much more that I can do.  The biggest thing I can do is explore the different ways to use technology to connect with other regions and cultures in a meaningful way.  In preparing myself for these experiences, I can better prepare my students to get the most out of connecting with other people.

Section 4: Human Performance Technology (HPT)

In my school, we have been using PLC’s (professional learning communities) as a way for teachers to get together from different departments to address problems of practice (POP).  Each week, the PLC leaders meet to address concerns presented by the faculty and to discuss or develop a problem of practice, which is usually a school-wide issue that needs to be addressed.  Recently, we were presented with the problem of student motivation in the classroom and alternatives to traditional lecture models.  I think this meets the criteria we were tasked with.  It is practical in that it is an actual problem that requires a solution, it is feasible in that there are research-based alternative to teaching methods that not only improve academic performance, but also motivation, and it is important because learning absolutely cannot take place in an environment where the students are not motivated to learn. 

Performance support systems are systems that provide support and information to users/employees/faculty/parents/etc. with information and tools as needed.  It’s different from training and professional development because training can’t happen at the exact instant that a problem arises.  A performance support system allows someone to troubleshoot an issue the moment it arises.  Right now, we don’t have anything in place that would address our motivation issue directly, but you could create a shareable database that allows you to select different teaching strategies and report data collected on the success of those strategies.  We do, however, have an underutilized database that teachers can access and add to on specific students in which we can list specific problems or behaviors of individual students and describe strategies that have worked with that student in the past.  It is a little unwieldy for use for whole-class reporting, but it is a start. 

In order to address the problem of motivation and the effectiveness of different teaching strategies, I think we would need an information repository system for reporting strategies used and the results of using that strategy (like Google Forms) with someone on the back-end compiling the information into a searchable database that we can use to select the best strategy for a given activity.  A file sharing system would also be beneficial for disseminating strategy information and lesson templates that can be easily adapted to different subject areas.  We already have internal communities in the PLCs and internal email communication for sharing information.

I am not doing too well coming up with informal learning experiences that I have participated in, but I try to create those experiences for my students as much as possible.  Many of these are the “teachable moments” that we hear so much about; moments that pop up seemingly unplanned and are used to drive a point home or raise a new question.  Much of the work I have my students do involves them exploring and researching answers to questions that I pose or ones that come up on their own.  Turning the student’s questions back on them forces them to think about what they are working on and process the information in front of them.  Most of the time, they answer their own question and are better for it.  Sometimes, like today, I have an activity that, by all appearances, is a total and catastrophic failure but I can still salvage value from the it and the kids still learn a thing or two.  I think that some of that can be codified and managed.  Some of it is the “art” of teaching that no one seems to have been able to teach yet.  I feel comfortable now with these moments because I have finally been teaching long enough that I know my content well and I have experiences from when things went sideways to draw from.  I don’t know that you can teach that.

Section 3: Evaluating, Implementing and Managing Instructional Programs & Projects

This week, our task was to use an evaluation model to evaluate our instruction. I went with the logic model because it requires a clear understanding of the needs to be fulfilled and well-defined goals to reach. More robust models that I have used in the past have an ongoing evaluation piece that requires you to examine each step (inputs, outputs, and outcomes) throughout the process, from initial planning to summative review once the program is completed.

Example Diagram of Logic Model

 A few years ago, I used the logic model in a Scientific Research and Design course I taught using epidemiology as the main theme. In a nutshell, the course uses the epidemiology concepts to teach students how to critically evaluate information and conduct investigations scientifically. Students investigate an issue on their campus (ex: adolescent obesity), gather data from the student population, report their findings, and develop an intervention plan. Then they present everything to a panel of peers, teachers, admins, and members of the public. The evaluative piece comes from the constant reflection and revision of their plans as they determine their inputs, outputs, and outcomes. The outcome section is in itself an evaluative step because the students were forced to create measurable goals for their intervention plan.

 In my scarce resource scenario, I have been tasked with implementing a one-to-one iPad initiative to create a paperless classroom, incorporating Google Apps for Education and other apps as needed (Evernote and Notability, for example). Assuming I have a role similar to a district technology integration specialist/instructional coach, I would include the campus technologist on my campus for troubleshooting and technical support, at least 3 teachers as pilot classrooms to actually implement the new program and gather data, and the cohort or departmental administrator (or the one most likely to go along with this crazy scheme) for administrative support (unless I am granted that authority). I would be serving as facilitator, go-between, and curriculum resource to help the teachers. The main criteria I would use to select teachers would be a willingness to participate fully in this program; actual experience implementing this sort of program would be necessary and part of the professional development would include how to use the iPads and programs in the classroom setting. The same goes with the administrator. That would put me somewhere around phase 1 of situational leadership until the team gets more comfortable working together (phase 2). Hopefully, as the teachers gain mastery of the program and the students start generating evidence of success (phase 3ish), my role can shift into phase 4 and allow me to showcase the results in order to expand the program (include more teachers, search for and receive more funding, etc.)


image credit: Logic Models: A Tool for Program Planning and Assessment http://articles.extension.org/pages/70478/logic-models:-a-tool-for-program-planning-and-assessment

Section 2: Theories and Models

So an interesting thing happened on my way to an answer to this week’s prompt.  From an epistemological perspective, I am a positivist.  I think that has to with my background as a scientist and science teacher.  The truths that I study are based on observable, measurable data gathered from the world around me.  There is nothing subjective about the layers of the atmosphere or how many rabbits are living in an area (as a side note, the literature scholar in me recognizes that all knowledge is subjective.  Truth is different based on your perspective).  However, I employ constructivist principles most often as a vehicle of learning for my students.  I think that my positivist viewpoint conflicted with one of my professors’ hardline relativist stance when I was in college.  He was very existentialist in his views about reality and perception.  I walked away from the experience thinking that our perception defines our reality (there is no spoon!) but that most people want to have the same reality so agree with the perceptions of each other. 

I generally try to apply constructivist model of learning in different forms, depending on the unit.  For my year-long courses, I like to employ problem-based learning.  Environmental science is a perfect theater for that sort of instructional model; there are plenty of problems to solve and most of my students come into my class with working knowledge of environmental problems around them.  I also frequently use inquiry-based instruction because I have found (and so have many other people with fancy titles attached to their names) that students retain information better if they find it out on their own versus me telling them what they need to know.  I like PBL the best because the relevancy of the work the students are doing is at the forefront of the unit and becomes a great motivating force.  In the summer, I teach a PBL academy for students to get extra credits towards graduation.  This past summer, we conducted water quality surveys of the San Marcos, Guadalupe, and Comal rivers and various locations that students were familiar with from growing up in the area and tried to explain what caused the water conditions that we observed on our sampling trips.  The overall goal was a presentation of their findings and explanations of trends and connections between different locations (ex: why the water quality was different between the Comal Springs, and just a few yards downstream past a public wading area).  The instances in which I was giving them information that they needed to know were limited to relaying basic information and that was because the program was only 3 weeks (most of that time needed to be devoted to water sampling time, travel, and project work time).  It was faster for me to give them the information in a traditional, lecture format.  But, even then, I still inject inquiry into the lecture by asking them to fill in “holes” that I left at strategic points in my lecture for them to fill using prior knowledge I knew they had.  I think to improve upon the experience for next year (which I am hoping will be the case) I can create more inquiry experiences and create opportunities for more classroom discussion in which the students lead the conversation and build the knowledge they need to have, instead of me leading the conversation.  

Section 1: Defining the IDT Field

1. How do the definitions in the first chapter compare to your own definition of instructional or educational technology?  What experiences or other influences have shaped your definition? How has your definition changed from examining the definitions in the first chapter of this book?

When I was reading the different definitions presented in the first chapter throughout the years, I had difficulty with their use of the phrase "instructional technology" and "educational technology".  To me, educational technology has always been the tools that a teacher uses during instructional design and implementation.  My view on technology is more in line with the definition created by the textbook authors in that the focus is on the process of design and implementation by using technology as a resource.  I view technology more as instructional media than an entire design process.  I still have problems with the label "instruction design and technology".  I consider technology similar to textbooks, lab manuals, manipulatives, overheads, and chalkboards; they are tools that I use as a teacher when I am design lessons and units that I feel will most effectively allow my students to learn what they need to learn to satisfy whatever entity need satisfying.  If anything, the chapter has more firmly cemented my opinion on how technology should be labeled and utilized. 

2. Next, think of a lesson or unit of instruction that you have developed. Or if you haven’t ever taught or developed instruction, think of one that you have received. How does that lesson adhere or fail to adhere to the six characteristics of instructional design? How would you redesign it to better adhere to the six characteristics in the chapter. 

I am a science teacher, so I use laboratory activities as a tool to teach my students in a way that allows them to directly interact with and manipulate variables within a particular concept.  Today, we had a lab in my AP Environmental Science class in which the students were manipulating blocks of wood in different ways.  They had thin pieces and thick pieces of wood that were supposed to represent the different types of tectonics plates that rest on a layer of shaving cream "magma".  The goal was to understand and predict the movement of tectonic plates (Goal oriented).  The activity was design so the students had to explore the results of different scenarios, explain what was happening to the wood pieces, and related that to how tectonic plates moved.  The lab could have been completed without me present; some of the content that my students were dealing with we had not explicitly discussed in class and one of my classroom procedures is that students look up answers to "basic" questions on their own and then come to me when they have trouble stitching the elements together to make the "big picture" (learner centered).  I think that the activity meets most of the other characteristics; the outcome of the lab can be measured reliably and validly through the conclusion questions that require them to focus on the actual processes and it is self-correcting in that they fill in the gaps of their knowledge as the go.  Focus on a meaningful performance is hard because I can't get my students out there to directly manipulate tectonic plates (I've been told my budget is not big enough for field trips...) and it wasn't a team effort per se because I modified an activity that I acquired through a teacher group I am affiliated with.  

3. In the 3^rd chapter, Reiser distinguishes instructional media from instructional design, excluding teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks from the definition of instructional media. Why? Would you consider teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks as instructional media or not? Most importantly, is the purpose of instructional design to incorporate media into instruction?

Technically speaking, teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks are physical means of instructional delivery but they have been separated because they have become such an integral part of teaching.  Teachers are the experts that convey information and faciliate learning, using boards as a method of conveyance and textbooks as an informational support.  They are as ubiquitous as the walls and ceiling of a traditional school building.  

I think the one of the purposes of instructional design is to incorporate media into instruction.  I wouldn't say it is the purpose, though.  The overall purpose is to create learning opportunities with specific goals in mind and part of that process should include evaluating the best tools to use to achieve that goal.  It should not, however, be in incorporate instructional media for the sake of the media alone.