EDUC-7102-2/EDUC-8842-2 Principles of Distance Education
Instructor: Timothy Powell
Module 1 Blog Assignment
David J. Miller
Distance education, like all other technical–social developments, is historically constituted in the thinking and behavioral patterns of those who developed, tested, and implemented what were once novel systems. The designs thus encapsulate a worldview) that defines its epistemological roots, development models, and technologies utilized, even as the application of this worldview evolves in new eras. Distance education systems have evolved through three eras of educational, social, and psychological development. Each era developed distinct pedagogies, technologies, learning activities, and assessment criteria, consistent with the social worldview of the era in which they developed.
As evidenced by Moller, Huett, Foshay and Coleman (2008b), most higher education lacks good instructional design for effective learning in distance education, relying heavily on faculty not trained in instructional design or distance education. Additionally, training (as opposed to education) relies heavily on quick turn around times and one-size-fits-all approaches. K-12, of the three areas of learning mentioned in the articles by Moller et al (2008a, 2008b) and Huett, Moller, Foshay, and Coleman (2008c), has the least research but an incredible impact on a wide variety of learners. It is apparent that how students learn, as well as which technology to facilitate that learning, need to be taken into account when designing courses specific to the audience.
Simonson (2000) noted that learning in a face-to-face course cannot be equal to an online course, only equivalent, because the teaching strategies used in a face-to-face course do not translate into a technologically-based one. Again, it is how students learn within the medium given that is important. However, each industry has a unique need, time frame, and requirements. Instructional design, then, must continue to evolve to meet the learners where they are so that they, too, can continue to evolve in their learning.
The old ways of design are not sufficient anymore to design for learning activities across a wide population. To move forward, instructional designers need to reflect on learning theory (adult and child), the design process itself (rapid prototyping, ADDIE, etc), and the participant (college student, lifelong learner, kindergartner, etc.). Additionally, the skills of the designer should be taught to subject matter experts, professors, teachers, educational technology coaches (to name a few) so that the process of design flows smoothly and the best learning opportunity is made available to students.
References
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 1: Training and Development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, July/August). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 2: Higher Education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66–70.
Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. & Coleman, C. (2008, September/October). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5), 63–67.
Simonson, M. (2000). Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 29–34.
David, I enjoyed reading your post, and agree that not enough educators are knowledgeable about the processes of instructional design, which is necessary in designing instruction that will be most beneficial to today’s learners. As you stated, what worked in the past may not necessarily work today, so instructional designers and educational institutions must focus on such components as the learner (the learner’s prior knowledge and experiences and the learner’s background). Additionally, because distance education requires technology, instruction must be designed in a way that best uses various technologies to facilitate learning. It is also important to remember that the technology doesn’t replace instruction, it supplement it.
ReplyDeleteJGreen, good point recognizing that supplementation is the key, not the norm as there can be too much technology, distraction, and loss of interface with the customers-of-learning. An example would be multimedia that offers more video and less collaboration for feedback, participation and assessment.
ReplyDeleteBest and thanks, David
Hi David,
ReplyDeleteIn my experience with distance education in K-12 schools, most faculty members decline to be trained or ignore the possibility of being trained in something new for fear of losing their old techniques. I have often wondered why so many of my colleagues fail to realize the importance of keeping students engaged in learning through 21st century technology. The administration has to practically force teachers to take innovative technology trainings. Have you ever had this problem in your field of work? If so, what techniques do you believe will work in order to get teachers trained?
BM
ReplyDeleteMy struggle with a staff of instructors is to find a consistent approach to the use of varying technologies; while individuality is vital, many employ technology that has evolved too quickly,is not user-friendly, and leaves too many unanswered questions as to compatibility with merged programs. Forcing technology on teachers leaves much to be desired and is usually counterproductive; if it already works for them, they push back or comply with the minimums. I am finding as a first year teacher of HS students that I go with the tech that I know and trust; very little time to evolve.
Sigh.
David
Just posting a test comment to each blog.
ReplyDeleteTim.
Dr. Powell,
ReplyDeleteReceived your post.
David Miller