After reading Case Studies 7, 14, and 28 in our text, Streamlined ID: A Practical Guide to Instructional Design by Larson and Lockee, we were asked to respond to the following questions. Included are my responses:
1. One of the principles of streamlined instructional design is practicing right-sized instructional design. Describe an example of instruction where it was not right sized. What impact did this have on the teacher and learners? If you have not had personal experience with this issue, create a hypothetical situation and write about its potential impact on those involved.
Response: First off, I will say, that it wasn't easy for me to come up with a 'not right-sized' instruction. Our superintendent is well aware of technology, the needs for IT, and the technical supports required to run programs teachers are asked to implement. However, since our assignment is to give an example of not right-sized instruction, I'll use the following example:
Our district asked us to implement a program called MilePosts to track, what I can tell, the academic difficulties or successes students are having as they make their way through our district. We can access test scores (STAR, ISAT, etc.) but it is also used to track disciplinary measures and RTI. It has potential to be a great asset to our district and to other districts as students move out and can have all their academic records sent with them. For students who receive modifications not tied to IEPs or 504s it has the potential to be extremely helpful.
When implementing the program, we were given an hour long introduction to the program during our PD classes the week before school stared. That introduction included getting new login information, passwords, and a peek into all the features of the program. They tried to create right-sized instruction by dividing us up into 30 or so people in a group (the number of computers in the lab we used) to distribute the information. However, there were many issues with logins not working properly. We were given the first 10 or so minutes to get our login information and login; if it didn't work, we were asked to look over the shoulder of a neighbor and watch how they were navigating the program. As we all know, it is easier to understand a new program's implementation process and benefits if we can access our own data and apply it to ourselves. Unfortunately there was no data for our new classes coming in. We could only access past class information (test results to try and create our own right-sized instruction in our classrooms) which did us no good for the classes we had coming the next week.
We were shown how to enter RTI information for our students, the strategies we were using, the time spent each week, and the results of the RTI time. However, because the majority of us couldn't log in and access the information I needed to begin, I, nor many of my colleagues, used the program. It had potential to be extremely helpful in small group instruction, differentiation, and individualized learning, but it was another tool put back in the box to collect dust.
2. According to Larson and Lockee, how should needs be determined and assessed? How does a needs assessment differ depending on the context of the instructional design? Describe how the determination of needs might be impacted by the agendas or personalities of the stakeholders involved.
Response: As a lot of us have already stated, though Larsen and Lockee lay out the 9 steps of needs analysis for instructional design, it comes back to knowing and understanding the needs of the stakeholders involved. It doesn't really matter what the students' previous knowledge is if the stakeholder, the employer, the check writer, isn't given what they want. If there isn't a clearly defined objective of the instruction, there isn't any instruction to design. Which is why the initial meeting with stakeholders is so important.
There is the situation, however, that once you know he stakeholder's desires, you begin your learner assessment and you see the needs are not quite what the stakeholder expected. I think it would be a difficult situation to go back to them and see if they are willing to adjust their expectation based on your analysis. I have never been in that situation and am not sure how I would handle it. Anyone ever experience this?
3. Larson and Lockee make it clear that to approach ID one must be concerned with the learners, or those who will benefit from the instruction. Since ID can be applied across a wide terrain of career environments, how does one determine instructional goals vs. non-instructional goals? While learners may not be stakeholders, they are the beneficiaries of the instructional design. Keeping this in mind, how do you meet the needs of all parties involved?
Response: I have a hard time with some of the things that I've been reading. I agree that we need to understand our learners to be able to properly instruct. However, there needs to be an end goal in mind before we can analyze our learners to determine where to start if we don't know where we want to be.
I don't think we can please everyone, aka stakeholders because no one will be able to make everyone happy. However, when you've been to the stakeholders, determined their wants and needs, and come up with an ending objective, only then can you try and decide where to start, based on the learner analysis.
Thoughts? I need help seeing where my thinking and experience are wrong. Anyone?
1. One of the principles of streamlined instructional design is practicing right-sized instructional design. Describe an example of instruction where it was not right sized. What impact did this have on the teacher and learners? If you have not had personal experience with this issue, create a hypothetical situation and write about its potential impact on those involved.
Response: First off, I will say, that it wasn't easy for me to come up with a 'not right-sized' instruction. Our superintendent is well aware of technology, the needs for IT, and the technical supports required to run programs teachers are asked to implement. However, since our assignment is to give an example of not right-sized instruction, I'll use the following example:
Our district asked us to implement a program called MilePosts to track, what I can tell, the academic difficulties or successes students are having as they make their way through our district. We can access test scores (STAR, ISAT, etc.) but it is also used to track disciplinary measures and RTI. It has potential to be a great asset to our district and to other districts as students move out and can have all their academic records sent with them. For students who receive modifications not tied to IEPs or 504s it has the potential to be extremely helpful.
When implementing the program, we were given an hour long introduction to the program during our PD classes the week before school stared. That introduction included getting new login information, passwords, and a peek into all the features of the program. They tried to create right-sized instruction by dividing us up into 30 or so people in a group (the number of computers in the lab we used) to distribute the information. However, there were many issues with logins not working properly. We were given the first 10 or so minutes to get our login information and login; if it didn't work, we were asked to look over the shoulder of a neighbor and watch how they were navigating the program. As we all know, it is easier to understand a new program's implementation process and benefits if we can access our own data and apply it to ourselves. Unfortunately there was no data for our new classes coming in. We could only access past class information (test results to try and create our own right-sized instruction in our classrooms) which did us no good for the classes we had coming the next week.
We were shown how to enter RTI information for our students, the strategies we were using, the time spent each week, and the results of the RTI time. However, because the majority of us couldn't log in and access the information I needed to begin, I, nor many of my colleagues, used the program. It had potential to be extremely helpful in small group instruction, differentiation, and individualized learning, but it was another tool put back in the box to collect dust.
2. According to Larson and Lockee, how should needs be determined and assessed? How does a needs assessment differ depending on the context of the instructional design? Describe how the determination of needs might be impacted by the agendas or personalities of the stakeholders involved.
Response: As a lot of us have already stated, though Larsen and Lockee lay out the 9 steps of needs analysis for instructional design, it comes back to knowing and understanding the needs of the stakeholders involved. It doesn't really matter what the students' previous knowledge is if the stakeholder, the employer, the check writer, isn't given what they want. If there isn't a clearly defined objective of the instruction, there isn't any instruction to design. Which is why the initial meeting with stakeholders is so important.
There is the situation, however, that once you know he stakeholder's desires, you begin your learner assessment and you see the needs are not quite what the stakeholder expected. I think it would be a difficult situation to go back to them and see if they are willing to adjust their expectation based on your analysis. I have never been in that situation and am not sure how I would handle it. Anyone ever experience this?
3. Larson and Lockee make it clear that to approach ID one must be concerned with the learners, or those who will benefit from the instruction. Since ID can be applied across a wide terrain of career environments, how does one determine instructional goals vs. non-instructional goals? While learners may not be stakeholders, they are the beneficiaries of the instructional design. Keeping this in mind, how do you meet the needs of all parties involved?
Response: I have a hard time with some of the things that I've been reading. I agree that we need to understand our learners to be able to properly instruct. However, there needs to be an end goal in mind before we can analyze our learners to determine where to start if we don't know where we want to be.
I don't think we can please everyone, aka stakeholders because no one will be able to make everyone happy. However, when you've been to the stakeholders, determined their wants and needs, and come up with an ending objective, only then can you try and decide where to start, based on the learner analysis.
Thoughts? I need help seeing where my thinking and experience are wrong. Anyone?