effectivedesign.org » responses

Once again, I sing the praises of Cammy Bean (Learning Objectives)

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:07:01 +0000

I’ve written plenty of times about how much I admire Cammy Bean’s thinking (you must read her Learning Visions blog), but today she helped me out and she didn’t even mean to.

So here’s to you, Cammy!

You see, I’m preparing materials for my EDTC 5753: Introduction to Instructional Design course, and I’ve been interviewing people working in different aspects of the Instructional Design field. Earlier today, I interviewed Dr. Jennifer Summerville, an old (not in age) friend and colleague. The problem was, at the exact same time I had scheduled to interview Jen, Will Thalheimer was giving a webinosh about learning objectives. I wanted to attend, but I couldn’t.

But Cammy came through. She’s posted excellent notes on the whole thing, and it’s kept me in the loop and considering I couldn’t attend, I still got the information.

As for what was said, I appreciate Will’s breakdown of types of objectives and the questions he posed. I thought the questions seemed well thought out and they helped illustrate his points. I must admit I got different answers than some that were given, but I guess that’s to be expected.

And if learning objectives are something you’re interested in, you should read Cammy’s post “My objection to learning objectives” and David Merrill’s “Teachers should not waste time writing instructional objectives.”

Point/Counterpoint with an academic and a practitioner: On Cammy Bean, certification, and instructional design

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:19:55 +0000

I’ve had some people ask me to post some more of my thoughts on instructional design and certification. They were interested in the conversations Cammy Bean and I have had about those topics, and wondered where those conversations were going. Today Cammy e-mailed me, and she and I have been going back and forth, and she’s graciously agreed to let me post the conversation here. See it here after the jump (with minor edits).

Cammy:

I’ve been meaning to follow-up with you or at least say hi. I’ve been in the weeds at work, as you can tell and haven’t had much surfacing time. Nor have you, from what it sounds like . . .. But I don’t want to let the thread die.

What are you thinking these days?

John:

I’m thinking:
“AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!”

I totally agree. I’m still trying to wrap my head around this whole situation. It’s been quite interesting actually, and I think very good for me. As an “academic” you tend to buy into the notion that we know what we’re doing. And don’t get me wrong, I do (and I know you know that—I’ve worked corporate as a designer as well). But in the Ivory Tower, it’s easy to think we have the answers. Yet, one day, I stumble across some blog by someone without a degree but who is an instructional designer, and you think, “Isn’t that quaint!” And then I start reading it (your blog), and I all of the sudden realize, “This gal knows her stuff,” and “Why didn’t I think to ask that question? What a great question!” So it’s been good for me to remember that academics don’t have a monopoly on what instructional design is or isn’t.

So where does the conversation need to go? I’m not sure. I’m intrigued by this idea of who gets to be called an instructional designer. Why don’t we have certification? Mechanical engineers have certification tests that you can take (and if you pass you’re good to work) whether you have an academic degree or not. You have to be a certified pilot. You have to be certified to spray chemicals on plants. You even have to be certified to work on cars at Wal-Mart! But to be an instructional designer? Nope. One of my former students, Chris Duke, thinks it’s because we’d never get anyone to agree to what it should entail. Well, why not? Why can’t there be some sort of portfolio system for it? You know, you and I submit portfolios, and if my instruction is sound, then TA DA! You’re an instructional designer. We sprinkle fairy dust on a certificate, and you impress your mom and dad. Chris says that we’d never get behaviorists and constructivists to agree on what constitutes “sound instruction,” but I don’t agree. I mean, EVERYONE agrees objectives and assessments have to match, don’t they?

So assume we’re then going to have a certification. What goes in it? What do we need to be able to DO to be an instructional designer? What skill set do we need to demonstrate? WHO gets to decide?

That’s what I’m thinking, and I think it’s an important conversation. And I think that the only way to get an answer to the questions it for those in the “ivory tower” to collaborate with those “in the trenches.”

Thoughts?

Cammy:

Did you see Karl Kapp’s post on this subject — he had weighed in our our conversation (you were cited, so I figured you had seen it)…

http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2008/02/we-need-degree-in-instructional-design.html

I think trying to get corporate America to buy-in to the whole notion that you need a certificate to practice this thing (ID) that exists on this vast spectrum will be the ridiculous part. So a company has to get a specialist with a certificate to create a PPT presentation that’s going to be used as a self-paced eLearning? No way, Jose.

Let’s keep talkin’….

John:

I think that’s the disconnect between academia and corporate. I forget that in the “real world” there is generally no real difference (if any) between a designer and a developer. When I think instructional designer, I think DESIGNER—the one who designs the stuff. It’s the developer who makes the PPT.

That’s a light bulb moment for me. That’s one of the BIG differences, no?

Cammy:

Well, in that sense, I am just the designer and I am in the corporate world. But I do think I’m an exception. Look at the comments on my recent post about the current project I’m doing. A number of people responded that they do the design and build the sucker. The reality is that is usually a combined role (which is why IDs increasingly are expected to know the tools that are used). There has been controversy on this point on my blog as well.

But with the rise of rapid eLearning tools, the lines get blurred even more. For better or for worse, anyone can create eLearning. (Some would argue that it’s actually eLearning that’s getting created….)

John:

So what then, in your eyes as a corporate designer, is MY JOB as an academic?

Cammy:

Ooh. Now that’s an interesting question. I’ll have to ponder that and get back to you…;)

John:

Sounds good. For now, I’m going to edit this up a bit and post it. Let’s see what type of reaction and input we get.

I know it’s some of my colleagues CRAZY. They think I’m a big heretic. I think I’m a realist.

Cammy:

You are a heretic.

Did you read Karl’s post?

John:

Yeah. When I read what he thought I was kind of like, HUH? I mean, let’s be honest, as instructional designers, WE’RE NOT CURING CANCER. Lives are not at risk, though we act as though they are (and granted sometimes they can be—I think of an instructional evaluation I just did for the Department of Defense on ammunition packaging and shipping). But seriously, you know, in academia I think most are trying to justify their student loans and show off the fancy calligraphy on the walls than they are to truly trying to get to the heart of the matter. And the heart of the matter in instructional design is designing instruction that helps people learn better. That’s really all I care about. I want to know how do we do it and make learning more efficient and engaging.

But what I do, in my opinion, is no more important to the field than what you do everyday in your guerilla design sessions.

Cammy:

Although this particular guerrilla design project feels more like training than learning…maybe that’s the distinction/the difference.

John:

Don’t they have to go hand in hand? If training is effective, then won’t learning take place? Or, if learning doesn’t take place, then have they really been trained?

Cammy:

Yes, but…you can “learn” how to use a software tool, yes. But maybe where true instructional design is necessary is when we’re talking more about learning concepts, true behavioral changes…less procedural?

John:

THEORY ALERT: If learning can be broken down into different domains, then learning is learning, no matter what the domain. For example, Gagne said we have a) verbal information, b) intellectual skills, c) cognitive strategies, d) motor skills, and e) attitudes. He then said, no matter what the domain, for learning to take place, there are nine events that have to take place (although what happens in each step might vary depending on the domain): 1) gain attention, 2) inform learner of objective, 3) stimulate recall of prior learning, 4) present stimulus, 5) provide learner guidance, 6) elicit performance, 7) provide feedback, 8 ) assess performance, and 9) enhance retention and transfer.

Do these not hold up whether you’re learning software or a concept?

I think they do. I believe learning is learning is learning.

You?

Cammy:

OK. Learning is learning.

But Gagne Schmagne.

The reality is: you start to get into the shades of training/and learning. If you’re just providing performance support does the learner really need to learn it or do you just show them where to access the info they might need? Do you actually need to assess the learner? Isn’t that what their job is about? Especially when you get into software training…

I was interviewing a potential ID the other day (no master’s degree, although she did a full load of course work in Training & Development for a master’s…) — at the company where she works, the users wouldn’t bother with the assessments. They just wanted the info. So she had to completely refocus how she designed her training resources. This is the reality.

[I’m multi-tasking right now, so these thoughts may be ALL over the place…caveat emptor!)

I must also admit to feeling incredibly burnt out from this project I’m working on now…my perspective is probably hard and jaded. Just get the damn thing done and who cares about the rest!

So there you have it, Sports Fans. An academic and a practitioner both trying to figure out what it all means and how we work together. Any feedback or your thoughts on what we’ve said here are welcomed.

Two weeks of links! 2-16-08 to 3-7-08

Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:08:50 +0000

I’ve gotten behind on my links posting, but here they are for the last two weeks. I’m swamped, so no annotations this week. We’ll start with the links from my Google Reader:

See my del.icio.us bookmarks after the jump. Here are the bookmarks for the last two weeks:

More next week . . .

Can’t we all just get along? Or the need for instructional design certification

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:47:52 +0000

To say the last couple of weeks here at effectivedesign have been interesting is an understatement. First of all, I had been reading the posts at Cammy Bean’s Learning Visions blog, and had been linking to them on my weekly post of links. On my Links for 1-26-08 to 2-01-08 post, Cammy commented to me (on my birthday, no less) and said, “Hey there! I’m delighted to see that you’re getting so much out of my non-educated musings on instructional design. I’ll look forward to reading your musings on ID from the other side of the fence. Cammy” I’ll be honest, I thought it was just cool that Cammy had actually come and seen my blog. So I ponied up and wrote my This one’s for you, Cammy Bean! Or, is the role of the instructional designer changing? I began thinking about Cammy and others in her situation who are instructional design practitioners and how what their jobs are and what they really do and what we teach in academia. So I wrote about that disconnect in my post Instructional design in academia–where theory and practice RARELY meet. And that post really started things going. Stephen Downes mentioned our conversation on OL~Daily, and then all sorts of people started chiming in. COOL! So I continued the conversation with Cammy by writing how to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition and an immediately accessible instructional design education. Later, I posted Have we “Reclaimed” Instructional Design? to try and further suss out just what I’ve been thinking about instructional design as well as teaching and practicing it.

Read what I find interesting about all this and my thoughts about instructional design certification after the jump.You know, as I have started writing about instructional design, I have thoroughly enjoyed the mental exercise of it all. It’s been quite fun. However, what has been a real kick is to see some of the comments people have said about it. First of all, I obviously wasn’t clear enough in my writing. When I wrote about how theory and practice don’t meet in academia, and about how to get an instructional design education without paying tuition, I was speaking directly to Cammy. I said,

“I would argue that if Cammy read this paper (The First Principles of Instruction) , it would be all the “education” she would need as a designer. After all, what is the aim of instructional design? In my book, it is to produce effective, engaging, and efficient instruction. If Cammy can do that without the master’s degree, then more power to her.

So back to her question: where would she be with academic training in instructional design? Probably at the same spot. She may or may not be making the same amount of money, but she would more than likely be in the same spot.”

But as I said, obviously I wasn’t clear. Karl Kapp wrote that we need a degree in instructional design and said,

John Curry wades in with an academic perspective but then backs off and concludes that by reading one single paper by Dr. Merrill that one can become an instructional designer.

So I don’t know if I wasn’t clear, but I don’t think I ever said that, and I don’t know if Dr. Kapp has read the entire conversation between Cammy and me, but I think his comment is an oversimplification and misinterpretation of what I said.

You see, I agree that we need an education in instructional design. What I’m not sure of is if a person needs a master’s degree in instructional design to be an instructional designer.

I’ve been in this field for around eleven years, which I agree isn’t very long, but as long as I’ve been around I’ve heard the back-alley conversation about how we need some sort of certification as an instructional designer. A cursory Google search shows the following: Darryl L. Sink & Associates, Inc. offers two tracks for certification; there are seven (SEVEN!) different certifications issued by Langevin Learning Services (but I can’t get their URL to open); the Center for Effective Performance says you can gain all the skills needed to become a Certified Instructional Technologist; Washington State University issues a certificate in instructional design; Indiana University has a certificate in Instructional Systems Technology; Western Governor’s University has a graduate certificate in Instructional Design; University of Massachusetts at Boston has a graduate certificate in Instructional Technology Design; Cal State Fullerton has their Instructional Design Technology Certificate; the Illinois Institute of Technology has a certificate in Instructional Design; Regent University says if you complete their online BlackBoard training, they’ll send you “a Regent University Online Instructional Design Certificate and gift“; Lloyd Reiber, Rob Branch and the bunch from the University of Georgia have started professorsofinstructionaldesign.com, and they have three different levels of certification, and ASTD even has their own certificate and workshops.

I also found a number of people who say they are certified instructional designers, but I still don’t know what that means.

I just don’t understand why this seems to be so hard for our field to get together on this. If you look at the list above, you’ve got UGA and Indiana, two of the top academic institutions on board with some sort of certification, you’ve got one of the professional organizations in the field, ASTD, with certification (why isn’t AECT in this mix?), and even ISPI has the Certified Performance Technologist. It’s not like their isn’t a precedent here.

But then comes the question: who’s in charge? Who gets to say what is involved and how do you get everyone else to buy-in to the whole thing? Continuing the conversations with Cammy, what does someone have to know or be able to do to be a certified instructional designer? Is the ADDIE model the minimum requirement? What about the Nine Events? Do they have to know the difference between behaviorism and constructivism? Do the five domains of the definitions of the field have to be represented (Design, Development, Evaluation, Utilization, Management)? Or do they just have to be able to produce good instruction? And what is the definition of good instruction that we can all agree on? If you look at the criteria for the above listed certifications, most of them (not all) have less instructional design instruction than my undergraduates get in the preservice technology course.
I think this is an important conversation we need to have as a field. I think there will always be the need for our graduate programs, but as we all know, there are plenty of people with a graduate degree who couldn’t design their way out of a paper bag, and yet, there are also plenty of people like Cammy who can do it without the degree.

If we are to continue to survive as a field, we have to answer this question: what makes an instructional designer, and when do they become one?

Links for 2-17-08 to 2-24-08

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:31:06 +0000

This is my eighth week posting my links. It’s been a good exercise for me, not only because I’m keeping track of what I’m doing, but because I’ve also started blogging a lot more, and I like that. As I look over this week’s links, I realize that these posts are more the cool tools that I’m looking at, but that’s just fine. See this week after the jump.

Here is what I found interesting this week, first from my del.icio.us account:

e-Learning Reloaded: Top 50 Web 2.0 Tools for Info Junkies, Researchers & Students | OEDb I think I generally do a good job keeping up with what all the new tools out there are, but this list has some I’ve never heard of. It’s also designed well and separated out into categories like “learning,” “search tools,” “communication” and more.
What We Can Learn About Instructional Design from Post-it™ Notes – The Rapid eLearning Blog Tom Kuhlmann runs the Rapid eLearning Blog, and here has a very interesting post on how sometimes we, as instructional designers, sometimes don’t get to what’s really important in our instruction. Great read, and a great blog!
Getting Things Done Zone on OfficeZealot.com I’m always trying to be more productive, and this page is chock full of ideas . . .
More than 100 Free Places to Learn Online – and Counting | Mission to Learn HUGE LIST of free places to learn online, and I’m talking everything from bartending to massages to theology. Cool stuff.

From my Google Reader:

GOM Player from Alvin’s Educational Technology Blog A new media player I haven’t heard of yet, but looks interesting. I’m not necessarily a big fan of Windows Media Player, and I find that iTunes is what I use, but this one looks worth a try.
Kids Explain Podcasting from Podcasting News The tagline reads, “6th graders talk about what podcasting is and how podcasting builds on English/Language Arts skills.”
Just One More Book!! Children’s book Review Podcasts from EdTechPost Kids reviewing books via podcasts.
View PDF Documents in Your Browser at PdfMeNot.com [PDFs] from Lifehacker VERY COOL tool that converts your .pdf files so they can be embedded in your page rather than have to open in an outside application.
You and Your Money in 30 Free eBooks from Dumb Little Man – Tips for Life A link to eBooks on everything from estate planning, to how to buy life insurance to warnings about identity theft.
The Savvy Teacher’s Digital Tool Box: Screen Capture Programs from EdTech Gold Rush Alix Peshette reviews screen capture programs.
Writing learning objectives for the right audience from MindLeaders: Fueling the Learning Revolution Interesting post wondering if learning objectives are worth the effort.
GabMail from Jane’s E-Learning Pick of the Day Free video e-mail. Thanks, Jane!
25 Wikipedia Alternatives for Online Students from The Online Universities Weblog Do I really need to annotate that?
12 Screencasting Tools For Creating Video Tutorials Divided into free and commercial categories.
Make Low-Res Videos Less Blocky with FixMyMovie [Video] from Lifehacker This product is free, and I need to try it.
Wakerupper from Inspiring Iris Set up telephone reminders via the web.
Audiko helps you to create Ringtones in a Snap! from GO2WEB20 Blog Now if I can just get a phone I can add ringtones to.
Qik, Wix and Start4all.com from Jane’s E-Learning Pick of the Day I’m most interested in Wix, which allows you to create Flash content for the web.
“Successful blogging…” from Blogging IT and EDucation Cool tool that looks at the title of your blog post, compares it to Digg, and tells you how successful of a title it should be in attracting interest.

Links for 2-10-08 to 2-16-08

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:56:32 +0000

It’s been a busy week on the blog, so without further adieu, here’s the links for the week.

From my del.icio.us account:

Simple Spark — a great directory of web 2.0 applications.
13 Tools For Tracking Discussions in the Blogosphere — I hadn’t heard of a lot of these tools.
14 Simple Ways to Convert Your Sedentary Lifestyle — You know, one day I need to stop marking these, and start actually implementing them.
WikiMatrix – Compare them all — A great comparison I plan on using with my students.
Forget Word: 13 Online Word Processors — Self explanatory.
12 Essential Blogwriting Tips for Building a Successful Blog — I gon’t blog for fame or glory, I blog because I like to know what I think. However, it is fun to know that people read what you write. Here are ways to make your blog successful.
Facebook used to target Colombia’s FARC with global rally — I love to see new ways Facebook is used.
Animator vs. Animation by *alanbecker on deviantART — Now THIS is a clever animation. A MUST WATCH.
60+ Killer Open Courseware Collections for Web Designers – College Degree.com — Talk about a comprehensive list!

And see those from my Google Reader after the jump:

Kadabo from Jane’s E-Learning Pick of the Day — They say Kadabo is more than a home page. Kadabo is your home base. We’ll see . . .
Surveys Via Google Spreadsheets from Drape’s Takes — Seems like more work than I really want to do. However, it is an interesting idea.
Issuu – You Publish from Blogging IT and EDucation — Another document sharing site, but right now it’s just for .pdf files.
Teaching with Facebook from e-Literate Again, more Facebook integration ideas.
6 Websites That Will Certainly Make You Smarter from The Cranking Widgets Blog — Is that even possible? Just kidding!
Fill Out PDF Forms Online with PDFescape [PDFs] from Lifehacker Interesting app.
DVD Rip Automates One-Click DVD Ripping [Exclusive Lifehacker Download] from Lifehacker — I’ve got to try this, I’ve been having problems with the app I currently use.
It’s Time to Gain Control of Your Money from Dumb Little Man – Tips for Life — Yes, it is!
Access All Your Online Accounts with PageOnce [Start Pages] from Lifehacker — Tyler needs this one.
Doodle 4 Google from Global Learner — Google is sponsoring a fun doodling contest complete with lesson plans, idea starters, templates, and prizes.
Moonk from Jane’s E-Learning Pick of the Day — Jane says “With Moonk you can easily publish your photos, videos or MP3s as slideshows, video players or music jukeboxes on blogs and other websites.”
18th-century murder mystery game from Channel 4 from Infocult: Information, Culture, Policy, Education — Cool looking game that could be used in the classroom.
stickK Allows You To Put A Contract On Yourself from TechCrunch — This kind of reminds me of Hasslebot, but with some actual teeth behind it.
Create Great Photobook from your Online Photo Album from GO2WEB20 Blog — Orli says, “Mixbook allows you to create good looking photobook from your photos online: Flickr, Facebook, or photos from your own computer.”
Favorite Inspirational Youtube Clips and Youtube in Education from Cool Cat Teacher Blog — I love video in the classroom. See some of those I use on my YouTube page. See some of my students’ videos by searching YouTube using either EDTC3123 or EDTC 3123 (with or without the space). Some are actually instructional like I asked for them to be!
Genghis Khan Game from Larry Ferlazzo’s Websites Of The Day For Teaching ELL, ESL, & EFL — Another cool-looking game with classroom application.

An immediately accessible instructional design education

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:58:15 +0000

Cammy at Learning Visions asked me to whittle my list down more. As a former English teacher, I relish the thought of making my writing “tighter.” So while the purpose of my initial post on how to get an instructional design education without paying tuition was meant as a “here’s what you need to know,” I still missed the mark.

Let me explain.

All of these posts back and forth with Cammy have dealt with instructional design in a non-academic context. We have been talking about how to do the job WITHOUT a graduate degree. So what did I do? I gave her a graduate reading list. How’s that for good design?

So I decided I was going to trim the list to only FOUR things, and they couldn’t be theory-laden. Rather, they had to be something a brand new designer-by-assignment could pick up and learn something that would be immediately applicable.

See the list after the jump.

My list of four things to read would include:

The Conditions of Learning, by Robert Gagné (the beginning of ID)
Training Complex Cognitive Skills, by Jeroen J.G. van Merriënboer (the beginning of ID’s future)
First Principles of Instruction, by David Merrill (a synthesis of all theories and models)
The Design of Everyday Things, by Donald Norman (as I said, good design is good design)

So what about you ID fans? If you could only pick FOUR things to give to someone to help them get an instructional design education, what would they be?

How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:16:26 +0000

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?

Instructional design in academia–where theory and practice RARELY meet

Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:38:22 +0000

I’ve had Cammy Bean’s posts running through my head all weekend. I’ve been mulling over the differences between what I teach my students that instructional design and design theory are and how we actually do it. Anyone involved with the field at all knows that there is a huge gap between the two.

I remember having this conversation with a graduate school friend of mine, Platte Clark, a few years ago. Platte and I worked on our master’s degrees in English at the same time, and we shared an office for about a year. Actually, Platte and another guy, Rulon Wood, are responsible for steering me to Instructional Technology, as they were both working on double master’s degrees in both English and IT. At any rate, Platte left school with work still to do on both degrees. He had been offered a big job with Novell Education (I believe), and it was too good to turn down. He later went to work for Franklin Covey, but suffice it to say that Platte is HIGHLY intelligent, and a gifted designer. Again, he just *gets it.* Eventually he finished his MS in English, but not his MS in Instructional Technology. I remember talking with him about his frustrations about the academic field. At the time I was close to finishing my Ph.D., and I was feeling pretty good about myself. I had done a little freelance work here and there, but nothing really substantial. Most of the ID work I had done was in faculty support. I hadn’t talked to Platte in a couple of years, and as we did, he expressed frustration with the instructional technology degree. “It’s just not how it’s done,” he told me. “All those things they taught us don’t translate to the ‘real world.’” I tried to tell him that we needed the theory so we could improve the practice, but to be honest, the longer I do this, the more I disagree with myself.

Cammy commented back on my post about the shifting roles of an instructional designer and said:

“But some would argue that one needs, or at least certainly benefits from, the solid foundation of academic training in ID. I’ve done alright without it, but I wonder where I would be if I had a Master’s?”

My guess? Probably not. I’ve read enough of what Cammy writes to know how smart she is and what kind of work she does. She’s brighter than the majority of graduate students I either went to school with or have taught. She has great attention for detail, and that translates well to instructional design. Also, she writes well. She is clear, concise, and articulate. So does it matter if Cammy knows (and I have no idea if she does) what the Dick/Carey, Smith/Ragan, or Morrison/Ross/Kemp models are? What about Component Display Theory, Elaboration Theory, the Conditions of Learning, Learning Hierarchies, the ARCS model, 4C/ID, ADDIE, ASSURE, Schema theory, Cognitive apprenticeship, Social Learning theory, or Cognitive flexibility? Does she need to know those?

When I teach intro and advanced instructional design, I act as though you’re no instructional designer if you don’t know those theories and models. Well, I used to. Why? Well, my professors did. Now that could be because my professor wrote some of them and was/is a huge theorist. But even he has softened his stance. One of his latest, most influential pieces of work was the First Principles of Instruction. In his paper, Dr. Merrill explains:

“The premise of this paper is that first principles for instruction do exist and that one or more of these irst principles can be found in most instructional design theories and models. This premise also assumes hat these design principles apply regardless of the instructional program or practices prescribed by a given theory or model. If this premise is true, research will demonstrate that when a given instructional program r practice violates or fails to implement one or more of these first principles, there will be a decrement in earning and performance. Our survey of instructional products also demonstrates that many instructional programs fail to effectively incorporate all of these principles.

The hypotheses of this paper are that:

1. Learning from a given instructional program will be facilitated in direct proportion to the implementation of first principles of instruction.

2. Learning from a given instructional program will be facilitated in direct proportion to the degree that first principles of instruction are explicitly implemented rather than haphazardly implemented.”

Basically, Dr. Merrill looked at the existing plethora of models and theories and found out what was the SAME rather than coming up with a different model or theory–a big departure for one of the leading theorists in the field.

I would argue that if Cammy read this paper, it would be all the “education” she would need as a designer. After all, what is the aim of instructional design? In my book, it is to produce effective, engaging, and efficient instruction. If Cammy can do that without the master’s degree, then more power to her.

So back to her question: where would she be with academic training in instructional design? Probably at the same spot. She may or may not be making the same amount of money, but she would more than likely be in the same spot.

So what does all this mean? I spend a lot of time recruiting graduate students to our program and, as I refer to it, “preaching the gospel of instructional design.” If it’s not necessary, then why do I spend so much of my time saying this is so important?

Because it’s my job, and I love doing it. I love the art of instructional design. Any six year old can splatter paint, but that doesn’t make them Jackson Pollock. It takes a real talent to create great instruction fluidly, with purpose, and I can’t teach that. You either have it or you don’t.

So I find myself the longer I do this I come back more and more to my conversation with Platte and having conversations like this with Cammy. Theoretical instructional design needs to mirror practical instructional design more. And when it does, and as our field shifts to more designers-by-assignment, then we’ll be on to something important.

My gosh, what kind of posting maniac has Cammy unleashed?

Links for 2-02-08 to 2-09-08

Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:48:09 +0000

I’m behind on posting last week’s links, so I’ll get to them first thing this morning. From my Google Reader:

Instructional Design – If – When – How Much from The Learning Circuits Blog Yet someone else inspired by Cammy Bean at Learning Visions. I’ll need to post on this one by itself.
Create A Webquest Or Online Scavenger Hunt With Zunal from Larry Ferlazzo’s Websites Of The Day For Teaching ELL, ESL, & EFL I have got to try this one out.
Can your SKYPE do that? from GO2WEB20 Blog Orli Yakuel writes: “Israel-based startup ooVoo, is a face-to-face client desktop communication. It’s combining emails, IM and Internet phone all together . . . “
20+ Ways to Get Rid of Your Debt for Good from Dumb Little Man – Tips for Life Is there anyone who couldn’t use this advise?
25 Basic Styles of Blogging from Cool Cat Teacher Blog I had a post, Which blog are you?, on this one last week.
Instructional Designer as Consultant? from Learning Visions I think this one inspired one of my longest posts to date: This one’s for you, Cammy Bean! Or is the role of instructional designer changing?
Top 100 Tools for Learning 2008: the first cut from Jane’s E-Learning Pick of the Day Last year I posted my top ten, but I need to update that list this year.

And those from my del.icio.us account:

Howcast Howcast is a kind of YouTube for How-to videos.
Learning 2.0 eBook – Free | Mission to Learn I’m interested in what the term “Learning 2.0″ means, and how they justify coining a new term for learning. Isn’t learning learning?
ZaidLearn: Learning Technologies (250+ Articles!) A post linking to a database of over 250 articles from Learning Technologies magazine.
Open Thinking & Digital Pedagogy » History of Educational Technology (Dr. Richard Schwier) Um, the history of EdTech from Rick Schwier . . .
History Of Educational Technology Dr Richard Schwier (video/mp4 Object) A video of Rick talking about the same as above.
Best Practices of Technology Integration A BOATLOAD of integration ideas for teachers from the Berrien County Intermediate School District in Michigan. They also have extensive classroom resources .
SciVee | Pioneering New Modes of Scientific Dissemination Here you can create a pubcast of your research and share it. Is this like a grown-up Voicethread?
Achieve a Deep, Uninterrupted Sleep: Nighttime Habits If you know me well, you know I have a hard time sleeping, so this was interesting to me.