How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition

Columnists, People, Reading Responses, Research, Theory

Well, yesterday Cammy has responded to my post on the disconnect between academic instructional design and practical instructional design. Subsequently, the last five hours or so has been interesting. First of all, I see that Stephen Downes has mentioned our conversation on OLD~Daily, and that has led to a number of comments on my blog as well as others posting about them on their blogs.

I’ve got to admit, I’m enjoying thinking about these questions.

Wendy Wickham from In the Middle of the Curve has joined the conversation. Wendy has an MA in Instructional Technology from Towson University (I don’t think I know anyone on that faculty). Wendy makes a good point saying:

How I use theory - selling my instructional design ideas.

People respond to jargon. And, interestingly, people love learning other people’s jargon. I had never seen such an excited group of people as the day I introduced ADDIE to the Project Management group and related that process to how they do business.

Do I use ADDIE? Not always - but it does seem to be a nice way to keep track of the status of my ID projects.

Citing academic theory makes it sound like you are putting more effort into it than “I dunno - this just made sense. Whadya think?”

Do I need my MS in Instructional Technology to practice? No. The theoretical ammunition I received in that program helps.

Great point. I had the same experience working with some military officials earlier this year. But later Cammy responds:

I completely agree that this stuff impresses clients. I use it all the time.

But one can learn the jargon without going to grad school. And one can cite the academic theory by reading and staying informed.

Perhaps the (somewhat cynical) question to ask is — what’s the right amount of jargon needed to get by? Do I need to know all of the things on John’s list?

Personally, I don’t think so. I’ve gotten by well enough without most of those theories, it seems.

This comes back to my quest from last year of getting an informal masters in ID.

If one were to construct an informal, self-paced, DIY instructional design curriculum, what content would you include?

So Cammy, only because I’m a big fan of yours, I present How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition.First of all, let me reference some previous posts from my blog.

On April 1, 2006 I posted What my graduate students need to know. Specifically, on that post I’d pay attention to the suggested self-study program for Instructional Systems Development (ISD) by M. David Merrill (Yeah, I know, I keep referencing him in things, but it’s hard not to, he taught me design!). It’s outdated to a degree, but it has a solid foundation. He’s since given me a list of books to add to it, but I can’t find it right now. (Note to self: LOOK FOR IT!)

Next, when I was designing the EDTC 5203: Foundations of Educational Technology course here at Oklahoma State, I posted my Reading list for Foundations of Educational Technology. I later followed that post with Foundations readings revisited, in which I pointed people to Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 2nd Edition. Specifically appropriate for this discussion is chapter 32 of the text: The Future of Instructional Design (which I referenced in my original post). Also in that chapter was Merrill’s breakdown of the proper study of instructional design. I posted my responses to the chapter in June 2006. According to that chapter, I would be considered an instructional scientist to Cammy’s instructional technologist.

With that said, if I wanted someone to get an instructional design education without paying tuition, here would be my list of must haves:

• One of the following (Whichever you’d prefer. I’d probably read the first and then pick one of the following three ):
  • The Essentials of Instructional Design, by Abbie Brown and Timothy Green. It provides a great, fundamental overview of the process, including all three of the following books.
    • Instructional Design, by Pat Smith and Tim Ragan.
    • The Systematic Design of Instruction, by Walter Dick, Lou Carey, and James Carey.
    • Designing Effective Instruction, by Gary Morrison, Steven Ross and Jerrold Kemp.
• The Conditions of Learning, by Robert Gagné. This is a seminal work, and in my opinion, a must have.
• The ID Casebook, by Peggy Ertmer and Jim Quinn. A case study approach to implementing ID in various arenas.
• Training Complex Cognitive Skills, by Jeroen J.G. van Merriënboer. Dr. Merrill says this is the most significant work since Gagné’s Conditions of Learning. This design takes us beyond the simplistic domains of learning we’ve always dealt with and answers the question, “What if it’s a combination of domains?” FANTASTIC book.
• The Design of Everyday Things, by Donald Norman. Good design is good design.
• What Engineers Know and How They Know it, by Walter G. Vincenti. A book on how engineers solve design problems. After all, aren’t we educational engineers?
• Instructional Technology: The Definition and Domains of the Field, by Barbara Seels and Rita Richey or Educational Technology: A Definition with Commentary (more recent), by Al Januszewski, Michael Molenda, and Phillip Harris.
• Preparing Instructional Objectives, by Robert Mager. Ahh, the beginning . . .
• Rapid Instructional Design, by George M. Piskurich. This is more like it’s done in the “real world,” isn’t it?
• Absolute Beginner’s Guide to Project Management, by Gregory Horine. Like we’ve already established in my first post to Cammy, this is where we are headed.
• A Practical Guide to Needs Assessment, by Kavita Gupta, Cathy Sleezer, and Darlene Russ-Eft.  Another good one (but about 20 years old) is Training Needs Assessment by Allison Rossett.
• Psychology of Learning for Instruction, by Marcy Driscoll. We need an idea of what we believe how people learn.
• Survey of Instructional Development Models, by Kent Gustafson and Rob Branch. Nice overview of the models.
• Instructional Design Theories and Models, Volume 1, and Volume 2, by Charlie Reigeluth. They are kind of dense reading, but well worth it.

Disclaimer: In these last series of posts, I am in NO WAY saying that it isn’t necessary or beneficial to have academic training.  I actually had Tyler Wardle, of our Ph.D. recruits,  tell me last night that I shouldn’t have posted what I did until he actually entered our program (or someone else’s).  So perhaps I wasn’t clear.  I do believe the theory informs practice, and that knowing the theory should make you a better designer.  When I commented that it wouldn’t make a difference, I was speaking directly to Cammy.  I was saying that she seems smart enough that it probably wouldn’t make a difference to her situation.

So there you have it, Cammy. I hope this helps.

Comments, anyone? What did I leave off?

dr.curry @ February 13, 2008