The Successive Approximation Model (SAM) is an excellent example of how to construct learning experiences using input from various stakeholders that are continuously reviewed, redesigned, and improved. I am a certified Project Management Professional (PMP), which is very similar to Agile project management. Both Agile and SAM embrace and encourage change. The learning experiences created in SAM must be meaningful, memorable, and motivational to keep the learners' attention, provide continuous performance guidance, and encourage new behaviors. Tasks are done sequentially and are repeated. The preparation phase is a reasonably quick process.
Savvy Start is intriguing to me because it is the part of the process I have personally been involved in when my school created new programming. I honestly did not know this is what the process was called before the reading this week. It is a brainstorming session with all key stakeholders present to gather information. Each person brings different expertise and a unique perspective to the process. It makes everyone feel like they are part of the process instead of a dean or director implementing new programming without any input. I participate in this process to look at the cost of the budget and staffing. Some of the questions I look for answers to are: 1. Do we have the capacity with our current staff to support this new program? What ancillary costs will we incur in addition to staffing – new technology, additional classroom or office space, or additional faculty? Faculty advisors are at the table to look at the learning objectives addressed by the new program. Does the design address the course objectives? We usually have two or three current students at the table to bring the learner's perspective to the group. Will this program address the needs of the students? How will this program enhance the students' academic experience compared to current instruction? There is also someone considered a subject matter expert (SME) in the course content, usually one of our full-time faculty members. The associate dean in charge of instructional design for the college is the person on the team that serves as the prototyper and ensures that the course's design is in line with university guidelines. We are lucky that we have a faculty member on staff that is also a certified PMP, and he runs the meeting. We allocate no more than two half-day sessions to brainstorming. It is challenging to get all the players in the room for more than that amount of time.
Next, we move on to phase two, the iterative design phase. We look at the prototypes, usually based on what other similar college departments have done, review the prototypes, and give feedback. This cycle continues, making changes, reviewing the new prototype, and providing more feedback. We take a hard look at the learning activities to ensure the basic skills needed to complete the activities are part of the design.
If we have time, we will use the three-step model and have an iterative development phase. This model is beneficial because it allows us to have an alpha release where the instructional program is almost complete, and it kick-starts the validation process. The reviewers at this point are part of a much smaller group that is looking for minor issues. The validation occurs with a beta release. The beta release is where we engage our current students to participate in the course and give us feedback in testing sessions. We offer several opportunities for students to do this. We have a Student Advisory Council that provides this as a unique opportunity for their members. We always have a significant number of students that want to participate. They love being part of the process and being able to give feedback that will enhance their instruction. I agree with Dr. Cantu that this phase is crucial when using SAM in higher education. It can be costly to do, but it is worth taking the extra time to develop the design proof and have an alpha and beta release to get more feedback, especially from students, on the course as a working model. The iterative development phase's final stage is the gold release when we offer the course for credit. Our students fill out course evaluations at the end of each semester for each of their classes. This gives us another opportunity to review the instructional design for the course. We have had cause to go back and redesign a course based on meaningful student feedback in these evaluations. Reviewing and evaluating the course design should be an ongoing process.
The SAMR model and TPACK model can both be used to get faculty to integrate technology into their courses in smaller increments. SAMR is especially effective for faculty that are resistant to using technology in their instruction. SAMR breaks down how to use technology into four different areas: substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition. Substitution uses technology as a tool substitute with no functional change. In augmentation, technology acts as a tool that functionally improves instruction. Both can enhance the teaching without drastic changes. Substitution can be as simple as using a computer to write a paper instead of writing it by hand. Incorporating interactive multimedia like a video or a hyperlink in a lecture gives more depth and provides a more engaging presentation. Modification occurs when technology significantly redesigns the assigned task. It is also an opportunity for students to collaborate.
A good example could be students using Google docs to collaborate on a written assignment. Redefinition uses technology to create a new task that otherwise could not be performed. Instead of students writing a paper, they would use a multimedia platform like PowerPoint or Prezi to give an oral presentation. Our vlogs in this course are a great example of this. I've seen or used the SAMR model as a student and an instructor. It is a simple tool to use to integrate technology quickly into instruction.
The TPACK model provides more of a map for understanding how to integrate technology into the classroom effectively. It explains the set of technology knowledge (TK), pedagogy knowledge (PK), and content knowledge (CK) that teachers need to teach their students a subject, teach effectively, and use technology. All three areas of knowledge overlap, creating seven distinct constructs of knowledge (Figure 1). Instructors' abilities of all seven constructs are assessed to determine if there are any deficiencies. Those deficiencies can be addressed through professional development. TPACK shows a relationship between technology, content, and pedagogy and that the purposeful blending of them is critical. TPACK helps faculty that are subject matter experts in the content they are teaching but are lacking in technology skills. Professional development for those faculty should focus on developing their technical skills to use technology to present their content.
Every instructor wants their students to have significant learning outcomes from their course. Bloom's taxonomy focused on hierarchical learning. In contrast, the significant learning model is interactive and non-hierarchical and includes elements that would be considered affective under Bloom, like caring and the human dimension. Significant learning also requires lasting change that is important to the learner for learning to happen. An integrated course design is required for this change to occur. Each category interacts with one another to stimulate other kinds of learning. This aspect of TPACK is significantly different from Bloom's taxonomy. This interaction can happen when emotion is brought into the instruction, causing students to develop an interest in the content. This can also bring the human dimension into the teaching by having the student learn about their own emotion or their peers' emotions with the content. All the different categories can impact each other and increase the type of learning
The twelve design phases play an important role in course development. These phases are very similar to other instructional design models we have studied and should be applied systematically. Each step helps build the foundation for a comprehensive course design that provides students with activities that address each taxonomy category: learning how to learn, foundational knowledge, application, integration, human dimension, and caring. The initial phase builds the essential components for the course. Analyzing prior knowledge, attitudes, experiences, learning styles, and out-of-class responsibilities are critical. Just as necessary is understanding the knowledge base, experience, skills, and competence of the instructor. Identifying the audience and their needs helps establish the basic framework of the course. The next step is to identify the learning goals that set the expectations and guidelines for the course. Creating specific learning outcomes form a framework for creating activities that address new knowledge, skills, and attitudes. What is it we want students to learn in this course that they didn't know before? How will this new knowledge be used in the future? Those are the key questions to be addressed in this phase. Formulating the correct feedback and assessment that is meaningful and aligns with the course objectives is the next step. Assessment should be done frequently with rapid feedback that is relevant and builds students' confidence about their learning. Active learning activities should be interactive, presented in various ways, and relate to the taxonomy categories. Ensuring all the primary components are integrated and built on each other is the final step of the initial stage.
The intermediate phase of design focuses on the thematic structure of the course, the teaching strategy, and integrating them to create a learning activity scheme. Each course will have significant issues, topics, or themes that form the basis of the content. Teaching strategies will include a combination of techniques that will produce the learning objectives. This should consist of active learning strategies like problem-based learning or team-based learning. Strategies and course structure will create the roadmap of what will happen in and out of the classroom from beginning to end.
The final phase includes developing the grading system, writing the syllabus, looking for potential problems with the course, and creating an evaluation process for the course and instructor. The evaluation process's feedback is vital for learning what worked and what didn't in the class, allowing the instructor to make changes for the next cohort of students.
The constructivism movement gained momentum in the 1990s and produced several instructional models that are still used today in higher education. Constructivism requires learning to be an active process that encourages students to use tasks like experiments or real-world problem-solving to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. Learning is interactive and builds on what students already know and on their experiences. Students are exposed to multiple perspectives and have numerous opportunities for collaboration and social interaction. Students are active participants in both the teaching and the learning. The student and instructor's role is flipped, with the students controlling the learning process and the instructor guiding and facilitating the learning and reflection process. Evaluation and feedback are continuous and embedded in the assignments, encouraging students to assess how they increase their understanding throughout the learning process.
There are several instructional models used today linked to constructivism.
1.Problem-based learning is student-centered, using complex, real-world problems for students to work in groups to solve. The problem drives the motivation and the learning.
2.Case-and scenario-based learning presents students with a real-world problem that they need to solve. The scenario or case promotes class discussion and team-problem solving.
3.Cognitive apprenticeship uses situational cognition similar to a master teaching a skill to an apprentice - learning by watching the expert and modeling the skill or task. This framework informs the design of authentic, replicable instruction.
4.Interactive learning environments in online learning provide students with built-in tools to be used to interact as they develop an argument based on evidence to solve a problem.
Instructors continue to use all four of these models in higher education. I use problem-based learning and case-based learning in the courses I teach to allow the students to develop the social skills needed to work in a team towards a common goal and develop higher-level thinking. Cognitive apprenticeship has been used successfully in high-level foreign language courses. The instructor speaks to the students only in the foreign language, immersing them in the language, so they learn the correct pronunciation, inflection, and tone. This course is an excellent example of an interactive learning environment.
Instructional design models continue to evolve, building on the models that came before. Many instructors have shifted from objectivism to constructivism teaching strategies to accommodate more meaningful, active learning and real-world engagement for their students.
Objectivism learning is structured and predetermined. The teacher controls the learning process, and realities are given based on the notion that reality is perceived the same by all learners. Instruction focuses on transferring knowledge to the learner in a methodical way. The instructional strategies are well-defined and selected based on the learning goals and objectives set by the instructor. Students are passive participants in the learning process. Assessment is conducted at the end of the instruction and based on attaining the goals and objectives.
Conversely, constructivism engages students in authentic activities that allow collaboration and students to engage multiple perspectives. This is more aligned with how students really learn. The student controls the learning process through complex, problem-based, and real-world tasks. Students actively engage in learning knowledge that has a real-world application outside of the classroom. Meaning comes out of practice and from discussion and reflection. Reality is negotiated based on students' experience and knowledge. The learner sets the goals. The instructor supports learners in setting their goals and encourages them to reflect on their learning. Students determine which ideas are viable by testing their personal understandings against their peers. Emotion, affect, and engagement are integrated into the learning activities. The focus is on higher-order outcomes, including problem-solving, decision making, and critical thinking. Evaluation is continuous and baked into the learning tasks.
While constructivism promotes more meaningful, authentic, and problem-based learning than objectivism, there are some concerns about when it should be used and how difficult it can be to implement in the classroom. Because students are taking over the instructors' role, students must be prepared for constructivism to be successful. Students must be motivated and emotionally mature enough to work independently. Students must have the necessary prior knowledge to handle complex, authentic, real-world problems. Students must have adequate access to the essential information. Students succeed when they have the support, help, information resources, and advice to help them through a complex task's initial performance. Constructivism requires more of this support than objectivism. If students have low-level outcomes, they may become disappointed and unmotivated.
Constructivism can create more work for the instructor. Field testing is required to ensure the instructional design is robust enough to support the students. The actual learning outcomes also need to be aligned with the standards and objectives. Instructors may not be receptive to switching roles with their students and learn new skills. A supportive infrastructure needs to be in place, including mentors, information resources, and training for instructors to transition their instruction to a constructivism-based instruction design model successfully.
Constructivism may not always be the best education solution from a practical standpoint. If the content is technical material that must be mastered or remembered with precision or if a mandated exam dictates the curriculum, constructivism may not be the best strategy.
A group of learning professionals launched the Serious e-Learning Manifesto in 2014 to respond to quality concerns about poorly designed e-learning products (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). The manifesto lays out design principles and standards for e-learning products, contrasting e-learning and serious e-learning. The serious e-learning principles are consistent with a constructivist perspective and are much more student-centered and focused on meaningful, real-world active learning than traditional e-learning. These principles and standards are critical to addressing the challenges students and instructors faced when they pivoted to virtual learning due to the pandemic.
Several serious e-learning projects are examples of the continued influence of constructivism in higher education. These examples contrast traditional e-learning and promote student active-learning, interaction, engagement, and socialization.
Active learning classrooms facilitate constructivist learning activities. Space configuration promotes collaboration and cooperation between students. The instructor is at a station in the middle of the room. We use this design in our computer labs, where we teach our video production classes. The students are in five pods of four work-stations facing each other with a computer for each student. The instructor's podium is in the middle of the room. The instructor roams the room checking students' progress, asking questions, and assisting students. This configuration encourages the students to be more collaborative and work together to troubleshoot any issues or help each other with their projects.
According to an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, flipped classrooms were widely discussed and put in use before COVID-19. Students watch recorded lectures on their own before coming to campus for guided hands-on and group activities. The videos are asynchronous, and students watch them at their convenience. When students are in class, they can apply the video's knowledge to an active learning task. This configuration has been highly successful during the pandemic and could increase demand for flexible classrooms.
Makerspaces are physical locations with equipment that students can use to undertake do-it-yourself (DIY) projects. It's a space for students to come together using shared resources to exchange ideas. Our video editing labs are open 24/7 to students enrolled in our video production classes. Students have all the technology and equipment they need to edit videos for class assignments, student organization projects, or personal use. Collaboration and social interaction organically happen in this space. Students are curious about the other projects and are more than willing to exchange ideas and expertise.
These projects are just a few examples of how constructivism continues to take on new forms and evolve. Serious e-learning will continue to play a significant role in online learning
Diep, F. (20021, March 15). The pandemic may have permanently altered campuses: Here's
how. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-pandemic-may-have-permanently-altered-campuses-heres-how
Reiser, R.A. & Dempsey, J.V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology
(4th ed.). Pearson.
Every class I participated in as a student or as a teacher had at least one student who was challenging to manage. Their behavior was usually hard to control and creates extra work for the teacher to get them to pay attention and stop distracting other students. Skinner's behavioral learning theory gives teachers tools to use to modify this behavior by focusing on how students learn.
Behavioral learning theory emphasizes the impact environment has on learning behavior and is crucial to understand how to motivate and help students in the classroom. This theory is essential for teachers because it suggests that teachers can directly affect how their students learn. It also allows teachers to understand that a student's home environment and lifestyle can impact their behavior, helping teachers see it objectively and improve their behavior. Teachers show students how they should react and respond to certain stimuli to remind students of the desired behavior continually. Behavioral learning theory has been a game-changer in the classroom, allowing teachers to make significant student behavior and learning changes.
Positive reinforcement and repetition are critical to the success of the behavioral learning theory. Reinforcing desired behavior with consistent, positive feedback from the teacher will increase the desired behavior. Repeating the reinforcement is necessary, so the student's behavior is tied to a reward, so the student sees a direct correlation between the behavior and the reward. The correlation between behavior and the reward is another example of the stimulus-response sequence. In education, behavior is observed before and after instruction to determine if there are behavior changes after instruction. Observing behavior changes after instruction indicates the teaching was effective. If there is no change in behavior, the instruction is not effective, and the instruction needs to change to improve the student's performance. These observations are an essential part of formative evaluation that continues to be used in education today. By observing students before instruction, desired behaviors are identified as objectives of the instruction. Using these observations to determine learning outcomes also reinforces the need for repetition of the behaviors.
Positive and negative reinforcement can motivate student behaviors. If two students perform similarly on a test, but only one receives positive reinforcement from the teacher, the student who did not receive praise is experiencing negative reinforcement and will not feel that his/her performance matters. The students receiving the positive reinforcement correlates this with continuing to get good grades. Feedback and reinforcement are considered equals in Skinner's theory, and this influenced the importance of instructional feedback in future instructional design models.
Atkinson and Shiffrin's cognitive information processing theory is similar to Skinner's behavioral approach in the belief that environment plays an essential role in learning. The critical difference is that cognitive information processing theory assumes that each learner has internal processes that explain how they learn (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). Cognitive information processing theory is based on a multi-store memory model with three different memory stores: sensory, short-term, and long-term memory. Stimuli from the environment are inputs that are recognized and coded through the five senses in the sensory memory. Short-term memory filters the information briefly and maintains the information by verbally or mentally repeating it, connecting it to long-term memory information.
The focus shifts to how instruction can promote or hold back learning based on how information is processed in cognitive information processing theory. Feedback is used to reinforce correct behavior and to modify behavior by providing correct information to the learner. Prior knowledge retained long-term is a necessary part of learning new knowledge. This new way of thinking of feedback and how information is processed impacted the strategies teachers used in their classroom. This theory continues to be influential and is the basic outline for later instructional design models.
Gagne's nine events of instruction model is based on the learning conditions that support the internal processes students use to learn. The focus is on how what we know about learning can design instruction that facilitates the desired outcomes. The nine events are presented in three phases: preparation and planning, instruction and practice, and assessment and transfer. This model has survived the test of time and continues to be used today. Selecting appropriate instructional events and planning them in the right format and sequence is crucial in a successful lesson plan.
Both behavioral and cognitive information processing theories were developed out of psychology research programs in the 1960s and 1970s and are the basis for instructional design development. Future models were developed based on both theories, and they continue to play a role in education today.
Teachers use behavioral learning strategy techniques in their classroom in many ways, including drills, question and answer, demonstration, repetition, and consistent positive reinforcement. These techniques give teachers the ability to modify students' behavior and create an environment in which their students learn. Behavioral learning works better for some course content than others. For example, learning a foreign language requires repetition and drills using the language. Analytical knowledge does not. Using formative evaluation to adjust instruction to attain the desired outcome continually is crucial to higher education today and is something every instructor should be doing.
Similarly, Gagne's nine events of instruction are still used in higher education today and are even more critical for online learning. I use the nine events with my online students, and it works exceptionally well.
technology (4th ed.). Pearson.
We continue to use early instructional design models to guide instructional design today. The new models build on the ones that came before. The programmed instruction movement in the mid-1950s through the mid-1960s was instrumental in developing the systems approach to education. The movement is based on developments in education and training that occurred as far back as the 1940s. By the mid-1960s, many of the current instructional design concepts were linked to create systematically designed instructional materials. Skinner and others used an empirical approach to develop programmed instruction using trial and revision of the materials (Lumsdaine & Glaser, 1960). Data was collected on the materials' effectiveness, identifying instructional weaknesses, and the materials were revised as needed. Today, we call this formative evaluation. Identifying the specific objectives students using the materials are expected to attain is the first step. Preparing objectives that include a description of desired behaviors, the conditions under which the behaviors are to be performed, and the criteria to judge the behaviors are still supported today in the instructional design process (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). The focus on instructional design grew exponentially in the 1970s resulting in a large increase in the number of instructional design models based on previous models. Revised and updated versions of some of these systems-based models are still taught and used today in higher education.
There have been considerable changes to how we teach and learn since I graduated from college in 1985. I used an electric typewriter with memory to type my papers and make revisions and updates. I used a computer for the first time as a word processor through my employer in the late 1980s. Fast-forward to the present day, where personal electronic devices are used in every aspect of higher education. I am an administrator and adjunct professor in higher education. The classes I teach have always been virtual, so using a computer and electronic instructional materials is an integral part of teaching. Having experience with virtual learning platforms has helped me navigate the virtual world we are in today due to the pandemic.
As an administrator, I see how other professors struggle to migrate their in-person instruction to a virtual platform. Our students made the switch to virtual education pretty quickly. The struggles they have encountered are with professors who cannot navigate the virtual platforms to engage students in ways beyond lecturing through a computer screen. One of our professors with over 25 years of tenure preferred to use an overhead projector in his classroom and had no idea how to transfer his instructional material to accommodate virtual learning. Just as there was resistance from teachers to early new mediums of instructional practice, there was significant resistance to moving to virtual instruction in late 2020. As a result, I worked with the Office of Technology Services and Library Services to offer our faculty training and support. We started this training before our university moved to virtual learning to provide the training modules in-person. This was essential to ensuring educational instruction was seamless and remained robust in a virtual setting. We continue to offer training and support virtually to our faculty. Our campus provides the Adobe Creative Cloud free to all faculty, staff, and students. Students have always taken advantage of this opportunity, and we are finally getting professors beyond video production faculty to use the software to enhance their teaching and instruction. Unfortunately, some faculty are resistant to the necessary changes for virtual learning and are opting to take a semester off from teaching or retire. This is a trend that I think will be seen across higher education.
Instructional design began with the need for training materials during World War II. Psychologists and educators with experience in experimental research conducted research and developed training materials for the military. These materials were developed based on their research and theory on instruction, learning, and human behavior. Assessment and evaluation were used to determine who would be good candidates for specific programs to increase their success rate (Reiser et al., 2018). My father was an officer in the United States Marine Corps and would tell me stories of the testing he went through in Officer Candidate School. His goal was to become a fighter pilot, but the test results showed he would make a better commanding officer in combat. He ended up serving in the Korean War and lead his company in the Battle of Okinawa. This same design was used to address instructional education problems after the war. The Cold War and the space race caused a significant increase in funding for math and science education. I remember an influx of new math and science programs at my elementary school in the late 1960s. One of my classmates' fathers worked at NASA and spoke to my 5th-grade class about a new type of exercise developed for astronauts called aerobic conditioning. At the time, I had no idea this would become a fitness trend in the 1980s.
The human performance improvement movement in the 1990s has had a significant impact on instructional design. My university uses a performance review system that includes goal setting, self-assessment, and evaluation by the supervisor to address performance issues. The focus on real-world learning also increased in the 1990s. Applying what students were learning to real-world problems is still a priority today. Computers and other personal electronic devices have had a more significant impact on instructional design than any other medium. Students can learn virtually from anywhere in the world and interact with the instructor and peers via email, chat rooms, and social media. Information can be created and shared in a variety of formats. Some higher learning institutions were ahead of the curve with virtual learning and have not been affected much by the pandemic. My institution is moving forward on how to maintain a virtual learning presence and in-person learning when we are allowed to re-open our campus. I think there will be another increase in instruction design methods based on virtual learning.
Lumsdaine, A.A., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (1960). Teaching machines and programmed learning: A
source book. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Reiser, R.A. & Dempsey, J.V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology
(4th ed.). Pearson.