 |
Instructional Technology and Distance Education EDD 6000- Reflective PortfolioNorman D. LaPolice, MS |
HOW IT ALL COMES TOGETHERI entered in the Nova Southeastern University's Instructional Technology and Distance Education program with a BS in Occupational Health and Safety, a Master's in Internet Strategy Management and 30 years worth of life experiences gleaned from working in a variety of fields. I came to the program, however, with no formal background in the field of education. When I joined Cluster 22 of Nova Southeastern University's ITDE Doctoral program, I found myself studying and working along side experienced educators whose purpose in entering the program was to further develop and enhance in their profession. As my initial focus was on the acquisition of the fundamentals, needless to say, in the spirit of catching up and keeping up, I had to hit the ground running, and running hard - which I did. Several years into the program I transferred out of the Doctoral program and into the Master of Science program in Instructional Technology and Distance Education. As I reflect on the courses taken at Nova Southeastern University, I now feel confident that I have acquired both a broad and deep understanding of both the theory and practice of the five Domains of the Instructional Technology Field: Design, Development, Utilization, Management and Evaluation, and the theories that influence the Field today. Design DomainOne of the first courses I took was ITDE 7007: Foundations of Distance Education: Major topics included the historical, theoretical, and philosophical foundations of distance education; an overview of distance education technologies; and an examination of effective techniques for teaching and learning within a distance education system. Through this course I was exposed to the concepts of the Design Domain. Seels & Richey (1994) defined design as "the process of specifying conditions for learning". The four major areas of domain design theory and practice identified are:
This course provided me the motivation to read, absorb and critically assess the principles and assertions of several theories of learning. It also allowed me the opportunity to reflect on how I view the world of learning. From this experience I determined that my own view most closely aligns to the notion of "Constructionism". A phrase coined by Seymour Papert in 1980. Drawing on the theories of Jean Paget, this asserts that learning is an active process in which people construct knowledge from their experience in the world. To this is added the idea that people construct new knowledge with particular effectiveness when they are engaged in constructing personally meaningful products. I believe, therefore, that ensuring learner interactivity is underpinning to any instructional design approach is critical. Development DomainThe next phase of my learning within the program involved translating theory into tangible and effective work products. ITDE 7005: Instructional Media, as an introduction to the effective use of instructional media, offered an excellent transition by exposing me to the concepts of the development domain. Seels & Richey (1994) defined development as "the process of translating the design specifications into physical form. Major topics of ITDE 7005 included planning for instructional media use; visual communication; audio and motion media; computers as tools for learning; and evaluating the effectiveness of instructional media. These topics align to the four major categories identified within the development domain:
Learning theory is an attempt to describe how people learn; thereby helping us to understand the inherently complex process of learning. And although there are primarily three distinct perspectives about individuals learn; behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism, I do wonder if there are as many variations of learning theories as there are individuals who learn. And just to add to the complexity of these mental gymnastics for each of us, as individuals, how we learn is also influenced by what it is that we are attempting to learn. And we are also influenced by the setting in which we are learning. And so clearly from my perspective there is not just one approach to learning development to ensure an effective learning experience for all. My conclusion and for me the challenge in thinking through my personally philosophy toward how people learn is to be intellectually flexible in my approach in development of effective learning delivery vehicles. So for me a significant consideration in developing learning materials and the delivery medium is to consider how do I apply this requirement for "intellectually flexibility" in my own thinking about how is it that individuals' do learn. For clearly I need to be able to apply this thought process or perhaps more strongly said my own personal philosophy of learning as I work through how to determine the appropriate instructional media for a given lesson or program. This is also set against a backdrop of rapidly evolving options for delivery learning. During my program I had the opportunity to learn and deploy a number of computer based technologies such as PowerPoint, Articulate, Adobe Photoshop, Captivate, IClone, and Audacity, amongst several others. Utilization DomainAs I continued to build on my learning in the program and develop my expertise within the field, EDD 8123: Advanced Applications in Instructional Technology and Distance Education provided me with the opportunity to utilize the instructional learning and development theories within the context of a transitioning a classroom based program to a distance education program within a corporate environment. Seels & Richey (1994) defined utilization as "the act of using processes and resources for learning". The domain of utilization includes these categories:
By analyzing existing educational systems and instructional systems within the context of the Instructional Design and Distance Education program, I had the opportunity to see how all the pieces fit together, how they work together and in some cases how they don't work together. I gained a better sense of the complexity of creating an educational system and the difficulty of changing an existing one. It also strengthened my technical skills and provided me with a framework in which to create and evaluate instructional systems. Having a systematic approach to designing educational and instructional programs helps to organize the highly complex and interdependent relations of all the factors or sub-components of the systems. As you think through an educational or instructional systems design you have a set of intended consequences you are trying to produce. I think having both the theoretical understanding and the technical tools to develop a systematic approach facilitates ones ability to see the potential of the unintended consequences of various design choices. This is particularly important in a world that is becoming increasingly complex where the focus must be not on the means and activities of learning but on the results achieved by the acquisition of knowledge. Management DomainAlthough the ultimate measure of learning is the outcome of what exists between the educator and the learner, it can not be ignored that learning takes places within an institutional context. This simple fact translates into the need for a formal, sophisticated management structure in which learning is designed, developed and delivered. An opportunity to work through the practical realities of managing learning within an institutional context was provided through ITDE 7001: Foundations of Leadership and Management. Seels & Richey (1994) defined management as "the controlling Instructional Technologies through planning, organization, coordinating, and supervising." The categories embedded within this domain are:
I also found EDD 8119 - Contemporary Topics in Instructional Technology and Distance Education very applicable as I worked through the issues and challenges of developing a Distance Education Policy Manual. In thinking through structuring a distance education program, I sorted through, from my own perspective, the role of personal leadership and of organizational leadership, the distinct differences between personal leadership and organizational leadership and their respective applicability to a given situation. I think as corporate and academic institutions adapt to a more distance education culture the leadership paradigm will shift. The need for more structure, disciplined systems and processes increases significantly and ways to fill the personal leadership impact gap must be identified. Evaluation DomainEvaluating the results achieved is a critical component of the educational process. Seels & Richey (1994) defined evaluation as "the process of determining the adequacy of instruction and learning". The domain of evaluation includes four areas:
Evaluation of an educational program is based on both qualitative and quantitative factors, ranging from a subjective questionnaire completed by a learner to the statistical analysis of predefined learning outcomes among comparison groups. Several courses in the program allowed me to delve in depth into both the art and science of evaluation. ITDE 8001: Introduction to Instructional Design & Instructional Development and Delivery. Major topics included the assessment and analysis of, performance improvement, the systematic design of instructional materials and events, and the formative and summative evaluation of instructional materials. It included a number of formative and summative evaluations of our instructional project as did ITDE 7003: Research and Evaluation I and ITDE 7004: Measurement and Evaluation. Systems analysis by definition provides a framework by which one can analyze and/or describe any group of objects that work in concert to produce some result. The Instructional Technology and Distance Education program has provided me with that systematic approach to both understand and contribute to the educational process. In my initial studies I focused on how individuals' learn and on how to develop effective learning delivery vehicles to address those needs. Further along in the program I explored educational systems, instructional systems and their respective sub-components. As a result, my perspective expanded to think about how individuals' learn within the context of an "institution". Which itself is also consistently influenced by its place in a larger society. By analyzing existing educational systems and instructional systems, I had the opportunity to see how one fits all the pieces together, how they work together and in some cases how they don't work together. I gained a better sense of the complexity of creating an educational system and the difficulty of changing an existing one. It also strengthened my technical skills and provided me with a framework in which to create and evaluate instructional systems. Having a systematic approach to designing educational and instructional systems helps to organize the highly complex and interdependent relations of all the factors or sub-components of the systems. As you think through an educational or instructional systems design you have a set of intended consequences you are trying to produce. I think having the tools to develop a systematic approach also facilitates your ability to see the potential impacts of the unintended consequences of various design choices. As I discussed earlier this is particularly important in a world that is becoming increasingly complex where the focus of the educational process must be not on the means and activities but on the results achieved. Participating in the Instructional Technology and Distance Education Master's program has been a challenging and rewarding experience. Not only did I run hard but I did catch up. I leave Nova Southeastern University now confident in my abilities to excel in the field of Distance Education.
|