Compare and contrast the two definitions of Instructional Design in 1970
The two definitions of Instructional Design (ID) of 1970 have some aspects in common, but they also differ considerably. As far as similarities are concerned, the two definitions state that ID is aimed at providing proper instructions for students to learn more effectively (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). The two definitions also mention that there are certain tools used for instructing learners. However, the two definitions differ in the central concepts. The first definition focuses on the tools used, i.e. films, projectors, etc. At the same time, the second definition focuses on the approach. According to this definition, ID is a complex approach involving analysis, design, and conduction of learning and teaching processes.
Describe how Instructional Design has evolved from its beginnings through to the present day. What changed in the 50s-70s?
ID has evolved throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Initially, educators focused on the media. They claimed that ID is a set of tools that help in learning. These means were films, lantern slides, etc. The development of technology inevitably led to a change in ID. Television became largely used in the 50-60ss. It is possible to note that the abundance of media led to the change of approach. In the 1970s, educators developed a new vision and stated that ID was a complex process that involved analysis, evaluation, and implementation. The Internet also changed ID in the 1990s (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). In the late 1990s, educators developed a new approach. They focused on such aspects as ethics and facilitating the learning process. Thus, ID was aimed at encouraging or even inspiring learners to work harder. The present-day definition also takes into account these concepts, but it also involves the management of the tools and approaches used in ID.
Explain why taking a student-centered approach to instructional design can be a powerful paradigm shift. Compare and contrast this approach to a “teacher-centered” approach.
The teacher-centered approach presupposes rather strict instructions from the teacher. The teacher provides instructions that are to be followed by students. The teacher uses tools that help reveal this or that concept. When it comes to the student-centered approach, the teacher takes into account the learning styles of students (Harris & Clutter, 2010). The major concept of this approach is to facilitate learning, to make learners inspired and eager to know more. Admittedly, this approach can become a powerful shift as it helps teachers to evaluate the tools and methods used and develop effective strategies applicable in different class settings. The student-centered approach can be regarded as a basis for effective ID as it leads to effective learning.
Explain why it is difficult to write meaningful objectives early in the design process. How do the Pebble-in-the-Pond and Ten Steps to Complex Learning approaches address this challenge? How do they differ in their approach?
It is often difficult to come up with appropriate objectives at the early stage of the design process. It is difficult to define abstract concepts from the very beginning. In other words, it is often hard to identify skills that will be necessary to complete this or that complex task. The Ten Steps to Complex Learning and Pebble-in the Pond approaches help solve this problem (van Merrienboer & Kirschner, 2012). The first step in these approaches is to identify the task which the students should learn to fulfill. When the task is identified, it is much easier to identify the skills necessary for this task completion. It is also easy to develop methods and instructions used to facilitate learning (Shambaugh, Shambaugh & Magliaro, 2006). However, these two approaches differ in some ways. For instance, the Pebble-in the Pond approach presupposes the development of methods, tasks, and tools to complete a task, whereas the Ten Steps to Complex Learning approach also involves the introduction of several tasks which help the student acquire the necessary skills to complete the major, more complex tasks.
Do you agree with the traditional role of instructional media and teachers that the broad educational community has held for the past 100 years; or do you agree with the viewpoints of some professionals in the ID&T field? Why?
I support recent views in the field of ID & Technology. I believe the teacher as well as instructional media should aim at facilitating learning. The teacher should focus on facilitating learning and each tool used should correspond to a particular learning objective. ID cannot be a set of media and technology used only. It is rather a complex approach involving analysis, evaluation, and implementation. Technology is only a means to achieve this or that learning objective. This approach helps educators come up with proper strategies. It is also essential to exploit the student-centered approach which will ensure effective learning as different learning styles can be addressed.
What do you think the authors of Visualizing the Curriculum (1937) meant when they stated that the value of audiovisual material was a function of their degree of realism? Why do you think this was such an important book at the time?
The authors of the book meant the opportunity to provide precise real-life examples to support or explain some abstract concepts. Admittedly, the teacher, books, and chalkboard were seen as highly theoretical tools (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). It was believed (quite rightfully) that pupils saw the information in classroom settings as some theoretical material to be learned by heart. However, audiovisual tools could prove that the knowledge obtained can be used in real-life settings, which was important. I believe there was a need to change the rigid forms of education in the first part of the twentieth century. The development of technology provided educators with new media which inevitably led to the development of new approaches. Educators started searching for new ways and understood that facilitating learning is very important. Besides, fascination with technology (which stood for progress) inspired many people, both educators, and learners.
Reference List
Harris, L.I., & Clutter, J. (2010). What matters in a student-centered approach? In L. Sylvia and J.T. Barr (Eds.), Pharmacy education (pp. 25-57). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Reiser, R., & Dempsey, J. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Shambaugh, R.N., Shambaugh, N., & Magliaro, S. (2006). Instructional design: A systematic approach for reflective practice. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Van Merrienboer., J.J.G., & Kirschner, P.A (2012). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instruction design. New York, NY: Routledge.