What I Found Surprising
When I first started this course, it had been a while since I was exposed to learning theories. My initial exposure occurred during the Masters of Arts in Teaching program in 2004. In that program, I learned about many of the theories that we have studied in this course. However, it was great to get a refresher on them, especially now that I am a little older and a little more experienced in the field of instructional design. I found it particularly surprising that there were a few theories that I had never heard of yet directly pertained to my current job. An idea like Connectivism with its focus on technology was a tremendous help to me and gave me a few ideas to use when creating lessons. Also, I realized that how I learned at a younger age in a brick and mortar campus is drastically different from my preferred learning style. I am more of a constructivist learner where I prefer to uncover the answer to a problem using previous knowledge and new knowledge that pertains to real-world situations. Throughout most of my life, I was relying on rote memorization to learn. We now know that the process of moving information from short-term memory to long-term memory is challenging and requires us to relate the learning experience to experiences we can draw upon from our own lives.
How My Understanding of Personal Learning Experiences Has Deepened
As I reflect upon my educational experiences, I realize that the instructional methods that were the most effective for me have changed over time.Throughout my undergraduate and graduate degree programs at traditional brick and mortar institutions, I was convinced that conventional approaches to education were the "best" way to learn. In the last year of my masters program, my views began to change as I was exposed to many unconventional methods of instruction. These thoughts have been reinforced in my current career at an online university and as I began to work more frequently in an instructional designer role.My preferred method of delivery is a kinesthetic approach. I am a hands-on learner and I have trouble with a strict auditory approach. I remember sitting in a large lecture hall, listening to a professor speak for a solid two hours and having to take notes without the aid of a simple overhead projector!The first theory that best describes how I learn is personal constructivism. I thrive in a learning environment where I control my own learning rather than relying on rote memorization, "an emphasis on learner control and the capability of the learner to manipulate information." (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.65). As an instructional designer, I try to incorporate a constructivist approach into my lesson plans. For example, I just finished a project using Captivate that includes interactive training portions.I also am aligned with the cognitive approach. The essential element here is to build upon the knowledge already in the audience's memory, then use the previously acquired knowledge to build upon and introduce new unknown material in the most efficient, organized and structured way (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.61). I structure my online trainings in such a manner by breaking the overall lesson into organized, sizeable chunks and relating that information to previous knowledge obtained.
Connecting the Pieces
As I learn more about the various learning theories, I realize that an instructional designer has a tremendous responsibility to create trainings that will appeal to all learning styles. We are all different, and a designer needs to be aware of this when developing new trainings. It is very powerful to create something that can benefit everyone in the audience.
There are many different learning theories and many different learning styles that exist. The relationship between the two is that in a typical classroom, an instructor will have all different learning styles to design for. The trick is that a designer cannot rely on strictly one learning theory to create the lesson around. Rather, more than one theory should be used in order to cater to as many different learning styles as possible.
Technology is used to increase the availability of different learning styles into a lesson. By using technology in a lesson, a designer can include multiple learning styles into the plan.
According to Omrod, there are several different factors or needs that are likely to motivate learners. One of these needs is arousal. Learners simply need to be stimulated. We have all been in boring situations before. What happens after about 20 minutes? We simply lose focus and our minds start to wander. Another need is for competence. Learners need to feel that they have accomplished something and accomplished it well. A third need is in self-determination. Adult learners need to feel as if they are in control of their learning to some extent. Finally, relatedness, or a need to interact with other people is critical.Increasing motivation for our adult learners needs to have a solid plan behind it. To accomplish this, we can utilize Keller’s ARCS motivational process.
Furthering my Career
I now realize that designing instruction to meet an audience with all different preferred learning styles is difficult. Designers cannot include all theories into a single lesson in order to reach everyone in their audience. Rather, designers need to incorporate more technology into training so that multiple methods of instruction are being utilized. With this in mind, I have started to create lessons that incorporate some of the theories and technology that we have discussed in class with the hopes of it translating well to the real-world. Due to my enrollment in this course, I have learned enough information so that I am now qualified for promotion to Instructional Designer. The lessons learned here have already started to pay off for me.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Fitting the Pieces Together
As I reflect upon my educational experiences, I realize that the instructional methods that were the most effective for me have changed over time.Throughout my undergraduate and graduate degree programs at traditional brick and mortar institutions, I was convinced that conventional approaches to education were the "best" way to learn. In the last year of my masters program, my views began to change as I was exposed to many unconventional methods of instruction. These thoughts have been reinforced in my current career at an online university and as I began to work more frequently in an instructional designer role.
My preferred method of delivery is a kinesthetic approach. I am a hands-on learner and I have trouble with a strict auditory approach. I remember sitting in a large lecture hall, listening to a professor speak for a solid two hours and having to take notes without the aid of a simple overhead projector!
The first theory that best describes how I learn is personal constructivism. I thrive in a learning environment where I control my own learning rather than relying on rote memorization, "an emphasis on learner control and the capability of the learner to manipulate information." (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.65). As an instructional designer, I try to incorporate a constructivist approach into my lesson plans. For example, I just finished a project using Captivate that includes interactive training portions.
I also am aligned with the cognitive approach. The essential element here is to build upon the knowledge already in the audience's memory, then use the previously acquired knowledge to build upon and introduce new unknown material in the most efficient, organized and structured way (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.61). I structure my online trainings in such a manner by breaking the overall lesson into organized, sizeable chunks and relating that information to previous knowledge obtained.
As I learn more about the various learning theories, I realize that an instructional designer has a tremendous responsibility to create trainings that will appeal to all learning styles. We are all different, and a designer needs to be aware of this when developing new trainings. It is very powerful to create something that can benefit everyone in the audience.
I can vividly remember a specific class in my undergraduate years that gave me nightmares because of the way that I was retaining information. The course was Western European History.My professor was an older, scholarly gentleman who believed that instruction should be provided via lecture. There were no visual aids...not even handouts. It was simply him lecturing and 150 students trying their best to take notes. Even worse, the assessments for the course consisted of the names of 50 people that he spoke about in his lectures. We were required to know the dates that person lived, and a sentence or two describing their accomplishments.Now I consider myself to be an intelligent person, so I was shocked when I received my first grade of a D- on my first test. How could I have been so wrong? After all, I had repeated the names and dates over and over again in my head. How can this be?
I realize that my error was in my approach to converting the information into long term memory (LTM) by a process that Omrod refers to as rehearsal (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). By repeating the information over and over again, I learned it initially, but I was not able to recall it properly when taking the test. Also, my note taking skills were not doing me any favors.If I were to invent a time machine and could travel back in time, I would approach my own methods of retaining information differently. First, I could help improve my LTM by taking better notes. Using the metacognitive strategy of the Cornell Note Taking method would helped me to plan, think about, monitor, and evaluate my own learning, rather than just write down the instructor's words (Orey, 2001).I do attribute part of my failure to the instruction methods of the professor. It's quite obvious that he was never trained in learning theories. He never had the tools to properly convey his information to the class in a way that would be more easily retained. He was not relating the new information to what we already knew. Story telling would have been a great technique for him to use to help us relate.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–71.Respond Edit
My preferred method of delivery is a kinesthetic approach. I am a hands-on learner and I have trouble with a strict auditory approach. I remember sitting in a large lecture hall, listening to a professor speak for a solid two hours and having to take notes without the aid of a simple overhead projector!
The first theory that best describes how I learn is personal constructivism. I thrive in a learning environment where I control my own learning rather than relying on rote memorization, "an emphasis on learner control and the capability of the learner to manipulate information." (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.65). As an instructional designer, I try to incorporate a constructivist approach into my lesson plans. For example, I just finished a project using Captivate that includes interactive training portions.
I also am aligned with the cognitive approach. The essential element here is to build upon the knowledge already in the audience's memory, then use the previously acquired knowledge to build upon and introduce new unknown material in the most efficient, organized and structured way (Ertmer and Newby, 2003, p.61). I structure my online trainings in such a manner by breaking the overall lesson into organized, sizeable chunks and relating that information to previous knowledge obtained.
As I learn more about the various learning theories, I realize that an instructional designer has a tremendous responsibility to create trainings that will appeal to all learning styles. We are all different, and a designer needs to be aware of this when developing new trainings. It is very powerful to create something that can benefit everyone in the audience.
I can vividly remember a specific class in my undergraduate years that gave me nightmares because of the way that I was retaining information. The course was Western European History.My professor was an older, scholarly gentleman who believed that instruction should be provided via lecture. There were no visual aids...not even handouts. It was simply him lecturing and 150 students trying their best to take notes. Even worse, the assessments for the course consisted of the names of 50 people that he spoke about in his lectures. We were required to know the dates that person lived, and a sentence or two describing their accomplishments.Now I consider myself to be an intelligent person, so I was shocked when I received my first grade of a D- on my first test. How could I have been so wrong? After all, I had repeated the names and dates over and over again in my head. How can this be?
I realize that my error was in my approach to converting the information into long term memory (LTM) by a process that Omrod refers to as rehearsal (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). By repeating the information over and over again, I learned it initially, but I was not able to recall it properly when taking the test. Also, my note taking skills were not doing me any favors.If I were to invent a time machine and could travel back in time, I would approach my own methods of retaining information differently. First, I could help improve my LTM by taking better notes. Using the metacognitive strategy of the Cornell Note Taking method would helped me to plan, think about, monitor, and evaluate my own learning, rather than just write down the instructor's words (Orey, 2001).I do attribute part of my failure to the instruction methods of the professor. It's quite obvious that he was never trained in learning theories. He never had the tools to properly convey his information to the class in a way that would be more easily retained. He was not relating the new information to what we already knew. Story telling would have been a great technique for him to use to help us relate.
Technology is now something that I rely on for most of my learning and instructional design now. I use the internet and online library databases to search for new information. Storing information can take many forms, such as iPod for storing data, podcasts and video. Software such as Captivate plays a large role in my creation of lessons as well.
I have created an training at work that is for new hires who need to learn a specific lead management database. This particular training was recently developed and has been used three times so far. Since this is a technology system, the learners are primarily using computers during the training. There are elements of instructor-led training, which includes group work and group presentations. This is the first level of the training. After the instructor-led portion comes a series of six online Captivate trainings that each include a demonstration section, an interactive training section where the learners navigate a simulation of the database (but are still guided by embedded instructor prompts), and finally an online assessment to evaluate the learning. So I have tried to include many different theories in this training that will appeal to all different types of learners. For the adults whose technological skills are not as advanced as others, I included hints in the training sections that can help them discover the correct action to take (the hints are timed so they only appear after about 14 seconds so they can try to get the answer on their own first). Feedback has been positive so far, and by including a survey right after they finish the training, I am able to constantly refine it as I get their responses.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–71.Respond Edit
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Connectivism
As you can see in my mind map, my networks are mostly technology oriented. As I completed my map, I realized that the way that I learn now is vastly different than the way I learned throughout the majority of my life. When I attended high school and completed my bachelor's degree, the internet was in its infancy. Technology was really not present, and the computer I had really was only used for its word-processing capabilities.
It has been 15 years since I completed my bachelor's degree, and everything has changed. I now use the internet for everything from finding information to shopping online. My cell phone (now called a smart phone I suppose) now connects me to the internet at any time at any place.
Every single one of my networks invloves the use of the internet. If you had told me that this would be the case 15 years ago, would not have believed it. I was accustomed to learning the traditional way, in a classroom listening to an instructor and taking notes. Now that I use the systems and products listed in my mind map to learn, I cannot imagine how I learned before.
One of my favorite digital tools that helps to facilitate learning for me is my iPod. With it, I can download podcasts, store video and audio files and listen or view them later wirelessly.
The online Library is another great tool. I can find anything I am looking for in the comfort of my own home 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The databases found in the library are far more comprehensive than what a typical brick and mortart library can hold.
My personal learning network supports the general tenents of Connectivism. This is evident in the fact that my tools are technological. I learn with the support of digital tools listed in my mind map. So my learning is shaped by the networks that I create. My knowledge is gathered this way now. In my younger years, learning was shaped in different ways, ways not based in technology and it was limited to some extent. If I truly use technology and likewise keep up-to-date with technology, I will grow as a learner. My resources are almost limitless with my network connections.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
