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
No comments:
Post a Comment