Memorization Design
View more presentations from jake4life2005.
Feedback
View more documents from jake4life2005.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
IPT July 29, 2010
Outcomes --> Assessment --> Content/Activities etc.
We can't actually know what someone knows, so we use proxy to take indirect measures to try and figure out what the learner really knows. There are so many unknown lurking variables that can skew results (lack of sleep, stress, etc.). We get over these things by increasing the sample size (assessing with lots of items lots of times).
Objectives:
• Audience - who?
• Behavior - what?
• Conditions - constraints, support
• Degree - how well/how much?
I love that this model emphasizes the foundation of outcomes, and that assessment and content are derived (or should be) from the outcomes. The only issue that I am seeing with this theoretical model is that it is telling me that the content/activities are only connected to the outcomes through assessment. The logic is that if the assessment step is done right, then the content (which is based on the assessment) will accurately reflect the outcomes. The logic is sound in theory, which is what all this really is, which is probably why it is so popular. The problem is that we all admit that it is impossible to assess learning directly. Let's bring some more "logic" into this framework. A perfect assessment needs to be direct, or else there will always be lurking variables that will skew and widen the gap between perceived performance and actual comprehension/learning. Assessing learning cannot be direct, only indirect (even though indirect assessments can get pretty close). Thus it is impossible to design a perfect assessment. Following with this logic, if our content is based on our assessment, which can't be perfect, then our content will only have the potential to be imperfect. It will always be hampered by the imperfections in the assessment. This means also that the outcomes will never fully be met. Is it possible that the content can be designed to meet outcomes that can't be perfectly assessed? I believe that it is. The task here is to use the above model first (define outcomes, design assessment, and then design content). Then, the designer should be aware of the weaknesses of the assessment and try and design the content to overcome the weakness in the assessment. One can argue that without a way to assess, there is no way that the designer can know if the content is meeting the outcome. Well, there is NO chance in meeting that section of the outcome (the section that we can't quite accurately assess) if our content design is based solely on the assessment. There is a chance in meeting that section of the outcome if the designer realizes the weakness of the assessment and tries to overcome through the content. Is this a guarantee? No. Will the designer ever know if the content meets this section of the outcomes? No (or else there would be a way to assess it). Is there a possibility that it can meet this section of the outcomes? Yes. In my mind, that possibility is reason enough to try.
Alignment
We can't actually know what someone knows, so we use proxy to take indirect measures to try and figure out what the learner really knows. There are so many unknown lurking variables that can skew results (lack of sleep, stress, etc.). We get over these things by increasing the sample size (assessing with lots of items lots of times).
Objectives:
• Audience - who?
• Behavior - what?
• Conditions - constraints, support
• Degree - how well/how much?
I love that this model emphasizes the foundation of outcomes, and that assessment and content are derived (or should be) from the outcomes. The only issue that I am seeing with this theoretical model is that it is telling me that the content/activities are only connected to the outcomes through assessment. The logic is that if the assessment step is done right, then the content (which is based on the assessment) will accurately reflect the outcomes. The logic is sound in theory, which is what all this really is, which is probably why it is so popular. The problem is that we all admit that it is impossible to assess learning directly. Let's bring some more "logic" into this framework. A perfect assessment needs to be direct, or else there will always be lurking variables that will skew and widen the gap between perceived performance and actual comprehension/learning. Assessing learning cannot be direct, only indirect (even though indirect assessments can get pretty close). Thus it is impossible to design a perfect assessment. Following with this logic, if our content is based on our assessment, which can't be perfect, then our content will only have the potential to be imperfect. It will always be hampered by the imperfections in the assessment. This means also that the outcomes will never fully be met. Is it possible that the content can be designed to meet outcomes that can't be perfectly assessed? I believe that it is. The task here is to use the above model first (define outcomes, design assessment, and then design content). Then, the designer should be aware of the weaknesses of the assessment and try and design the content to overcome the weakness in the assessment. One can argue that without a way to assess, there is no way that the designer can know if the content is meeting the outcome. Well, there is NO chance in meeting that section of the outcome (the section that we can't quite accurately assess) if our content design is based solely on the assessment. There is a chance in meeting that section of the outcome if the designer realizes the weakness of the assessment and tries to overcome through the content. Is this a guarantee? No. Will the designer ever know if the content meets this section of the outcomes? No (or else there would be a way to assess it). Is there a possibility that it can meet this section of the outcomes? Yes. In my mind, that possibility is reason enough to try.
Alignment
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Justin J - Instructional Design
Justin
• Consulting - keep it an on-the-side basis. Full time consulting results in a huge personal sacrifice.
• It has everything to do with your professional network. Personality is everything. Need to be pleasant to work with
• Its all about making a team or group of people successful.
International Audience
• Students in 63 countries, but we don't cater well to them. Most of the students are the high adventure groups, but what about the villages in Ghana? Money. Need a philanthropic organization to fund it.
Business Model
• Someone pays us to do work, and they need to make money now. Theory guides our thinking, but practicality brings us home. The employable approach is to design quick, and learn - a constant evolution. We can't sit back and take 2 years to develop a final project. Rapid prototyping, iterative design.
Vision for independent study
• Fast, prototype design. Historically, publishing was the goal. This is outdated now. Distance learning program isn't content creation anymore. There's lots of stuff out there now. Before we were building stuff that didn't exist. Now, we need to be clear what the learning outcomes are for the product, (consumer-minded) and meet those goals efficiently. Anyone can learn anything they need from the internet, but it takes them a long time to do it. 1) meet with a costumer, get to know their needs. 2) Give feedback to what is already available 3) Design a way to not just create content, but to connect people to existing content and resources in a simple and understandable manner. More than just teaching content, we are teaching how to be successful on your own.
• Consulting - keep it an on-the-side basis. Full time consulting results in a huge personal sacrifice.
• It has everything to do with your professional network. Personality is everything. Need to be pleasant to work with
• Its all about making a team or group of people successful.
International Audience
• Students in 63 countries, but we don't cater well to them. Most of the students are the high adventure groups, but what about the villages in Ghana? Money. Need a philanthropic organization to fund it.
Business Model
• Someone pays us to do work, and they need to make money now. Theory guides our thinking, but practicality brings us home. The employable approach is to design quick, and learn - a constant evolution. We can't sit back and take 2 years to develop a final project. Rapid prototyping, iterative design.
Vision for independent study
• Fast, prototype design. Historically, publishing was the goal. This is outdated now. Distance learning program isn't content creation anymore. There's lots of stuff out there now. Before we were building stuff that didn't exist. Now, we need to be clear what the learning outcomes are for the product, (consumer-minded) and meet those goals efficiently. Anyone can learn anything they need from the internet, but it takes them a long time to do it. 1) meet with a costumer, get to know their needs. 2) Give feedback to what is already available 3) Design a way to not just create content, but to connect people to existing content and resources in a simple and understandable manner. More than just teaching content, we are teaching how to be successful on your own.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Our Section of the List - Feedback
Timing and Type of feedback
* The user-response feedback should always be immediate. (CBI, 7)
o "Research has shown, for example, that immediate feedback can be more effective for decision-making and novel information tasks(Jonassen & Hannum, 1987) as well as for lower level, knowledge-based tasks (Gaynor, 1981). For higher level tasks, such as abstract concepts and application/comprehension skills, delayed feedback has proven more effective (Gaynor, 1981; Jonassen & Hannum, 1987). Other research(e.g., Gaynor, 1981; Roper, 1977) indicates that concept acquisition is facilitated through immediate feedback while long-term retention is enhanced with delayed feedback (Bardwell, 1981)."
* The program should include knowledge of correct response feedback.(CBI, 3)
o This includes response verification (is it right or wrong) AND providing the correct answer
* Low prior knowledge students need response contingent feedback. (CBI 3)
o Include why the wrong answer is wrong and why the right answer is right.
o No searching is necessary for the learner
* High prior knowledge students need topic-contingent feedback.(CBI 3)
o Directs learners to (or provides additional) information to find the correct response.
o The learner is responsible for finding the correct answer in the information given.
* High certitude responses need quick and succinct feedback
* Low certitude responses need more elaborative feedback
o Certitude can be measured during the evaluation, dictating the type of feedback, or the learners can have the choice of how elobarative the feedback will be.
+ "A potential criticism of extensive elaborative feedback is reduced efficiency of the instructional unit. This problem can be effectively addressed, however, by providing increase learner control over the type and elaboration of the feedback (CBI 8)."
* There should be periodic feedback based on tracked data according to learner goals.
o There is a way to determine learner goals.
o Learning/achievement is defined (either by designer or user - Ex. 5 correct iterations)
o The results of the latest session is related back to the goal.
* The user-response feedback should always be immediate. (CBI, 7)
o "Research has shown, for example, that immediate feedback can be more effective for decision-making and novel information tasks(Jonassen & Hannum, 1987) as well as for lower level, knowledge-based tasks (Gaynor, 1981). For higher level tasks, such as abstract concepts and application/comprehension skills, delayed feedback has proven more effective (Gaynor, 1981; Jonassen & Hannum, 1987). Other research(e.g., Gaynor, 1981; Roper, 1977) indicates that concept acquisition is facilitated through immediate feedback while long-term retention is enhanced with delayed feedback (Bardwell, 1981)."
* The program should include knowledge of correct response feedback.(CBI, 3)
o This includes response verification (is it right or wrong) AND providing the correct answer
* Low prior knowledge students need response contingent feedback. (CBI 3)
o Include why the wrong answer is wrong and why the right answer is right.
o No searching is necessary for the learner
* High prior knowledge students need topic-contingent feedback.(CBI 3)
o Directs learners to (or provides additional) information to find the correct response.
o The learner is responsible for finding the correct answer in the information given.
* High certitude responses need quick and succinct feedback
* Low certitude responses need more elaborative feedback
o Certitude can be measured during the evaluation, dictating the type of feedback, or the learners can have the choice of how elobarative the feedback will be.
+ "A potential criticism of extensive elaborative feedback is reduced efficiency of the instructional unit. This problem can be effectively addressed, however, by providing increase learner control over the type and elaboration of the feedback (CBI 8)."
* There should be periodic feedback based on tracked data according to learner goals.
o There is a way to determine learner goals.
o Learning/achievement is defined (either by designer or user - Ex. 5 correct iterations)
o The results of the latest session is related back to the goal.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Class Notes - July 13, 2010
Multi-media
• WHY - this is the big question. We can't just say if a computer can do it, lets do it!
• There is no difference when we actually compare media forms (keeping everything else the same). We can't say "online instruction is better/worse than classroom instruction." When you keep everything the same, there is no difference
• Dual-Coding theory - Is it limited to 2? Shouldn't it be more complex than that?
• I'm not sure that this has anything to do with what we talked about or read, but I have just been thinking about why there is such a problem deciding whether Instructional design is a science. It seems to me that attitude, confidence, and other characteristic and environmental factors play a large role on learning, which is why controlling for any experimentation is practically impossible.
Spacing Effect
• So basically, who cares if it’s a question of capacity or ability to receive input (input speed) - when it comes in two ways (auditory and visual) it is more effective with the amount of time given.
• WHY - this is the big question. We can't just say if a computer can do it, lets do it!
• There is no difference when we actually compare media forms (keeping everything else the same). We can't say "online instruction is better/worse than classroom instruction." When you keep everything the same, there is no difference
• Dual-Coding theory - Is it limited to 2? Shouldn't it be more complex than that?
• I'm not sure that this has anything to do with what we talked about or read, but I have just been thinking about why there is such a problem deciding whether Instructional design is a science. It seems to me that attitude, confidence, and other characteristic and environmental factors play a large role on learning, which is why controlling for any experimentation is practically impossible.
Spacing Effect
• So basically, who cares if it’s a question of capacity or ability to receive input (input speed) - when it comes in two ways (auditory and visual) it is more effective with the amount of time given.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Openness Notes - July 08, 2010
Openness in Education
Reuse, redistribute, revise, remix.
Successful educator - shares the most thoroughly with the most students
Ideas can be shared without losing them. When we express ideas, (books or cd's) only one person can have it at a time. - When we do so digitally, it becomes possible to share.
Dr. Wiley talks about how the principles of supply and demand play into digital textbooks. He says that digital textbooks have unlimited supply. I think that he might be misunderstanding the rule. To me, the question isn't how many of one product you have, but it is how many different versions or options of that product exist. If one company has the only textbook for biology, it doesn't matter how many copies they have, they will know they are the only source and sell it high. When several companies are selling the same product (and aren't organized like OPEC) they are competing, and the market and cost will equalize much less than the first scenario. The issue isn't so much that digital copies are limitless, it is that there aren't enough quality choices and options to undercut the big bad publisher.
Reuse, redistribute, revise, remix.
Successful educator - shares the most thoroughly with the most students
Ideas can be shared without losing them. When we express ideas, (books or cd's) only one person can have it at a time. - When we do so digitally, it becomes possible to share.
Dr. Wiley talks about how the principles of supply and demand play into digital textbooks. He says that digital textbooks have unlimited supply. I think that he might be misunderstanding the rule. To me, the question isn't how many of one product you have, but it is how many different versions or options of that product exist. If one company has the only textbook for biology, it doesn't matter how many copies they have, they will know they are the only source and sell it high. When several companies are selling the same product (and aren't organized like OPEC) they are competing, and the market and cost will equalize much less than the first scenario. The issue isn't so much that digital copies are limitless, it is that there aren't enough quality choices and options to undercut the big bad publisher.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)