ETEC 561 Week 1 Reflection

Week 1

1.  How do the definitions in the first chapter compare to your own definition of instructional or educational technology?  What experiences or other influences have shaped your definition?  How has your definition changed from examining the definitions in the first chapter of this book?

When I began classes for my Master’s in Educational Technology this past spring, I came with the idea that “Educational Technology” meant using computers and the internet in my classroom.  With my first course, I modified my definition slightly to include all “media” devices from televisions to VCR’s.  The next course made me look more at how I created and planned lessons to meet certain criteria in both educational philosophy’s and technology ideals.  After reading Chapter 1 and the definitions presented as the concept has evolved over the last decade, I have come to realize it is about the design of the instruction, not just the technology we use.  Technology and media is great and does have place in my classroom, but if the content and objectives are not being met, then it is just playing on a computer or watching a video.  Not even close to what it is meant to be.  It is also about continuing the instruction past “school” and into the workplace.  This should have already come to me as I came from the business world prior to teaching.  Keeping abreast of the latest technology and processes was very important in my career field, as it is with teaching.  If I did not attend conferences and training seminars, I would never see how others were using the technology with success, nor learn some of the latest abilities of the software we used.  Reading the evolving definitions in this chapter, made me realize how our thoughts evolve and mature as we learn and add onto our prior knowledge of our field.  They also evolve as technology and learning theories are updated with new discoveries.

2.  Next, think of a lesson or unit of instruction that you have developed.  Or if you haven’t ever taught or developed instruction, think of one that you have received.  How does that lesson adhere or fail to adhere to the six characteristics of instructional design?  How would you redesign it to better adhere to the six characteristics?

Each year, we discuss catastrophic events and human impact in science.  A few years ago, I found a webquest that covers various catastrophic events and tweaked it to use with my Pre-AP students.  I did not know about instructional design, and therefor did not have that in mind when I finished tweaking the assignment.  After looking through it, I have decided that it did follow many of the six characteristics. 

1.  Instructional design is student centered:  the students work in teams to research their event and present their information to the class as a whole. 

2.  Instructional design is goal oriented:  the goals (objectives) were explained in the instructions that students received at the beginning of the project.  I made sure we went over them as a class, but they were also in writing for students to reflect on later in the project.

3.  Instructional design focuses on meaningful performance:  students were asked to present the information they learned during their research to the class at the end.  Each student was told to take notes on important points during each presentation.

4.  Instructional design assumes outcomes can be measured in a reliable and valid way:  for this characteristic, I could see possibly adding a pre-test to see what students already know, before they conduct the research.  Then when they finish presenting to the class, each would take a follow-up assessment to see if they added to their prior knowledge.  It does have specific questions to guide them in their research and also to let them know the goals of the project, but an actual before/after assessment would benefit them as well.

5.  Instructional design is empirical, iterative, and self-correcting:  I was a little unclear of what this particular characteristic is.  With that in mind, I am going to take a stab in the dark and say that the data collected from the pre-assessment and then the post-assessment would give me an idea if the students had learned the information I wanted them to, or if I need to go back and tweak the project more to get the desired results.  I am not sure what changes I would make, and since I did not use this project this past school year, I am unable at this time to give any information on anything that might need to be changed. 

6.  Instructional design typically is a team effort:  this might be one of the hardest ones for me.  I typically find things on the internet and if needed re-create them based on the original concept.  My colleagues usually ask me to find something as they are unsure how to find it.  I do ask their opinions before making the final product, but usually, I am the one who designs it.  After reading this characteristic, I realize how important it is to collaborate on ideas rather than doing all the work myself.  It might also save me a lot of time spent on weekends “working” when I should be saving that time for my family. 

Since it has been at least a year since I used this project, I am not able at this time to give any exact information on what needs to be changed.  I plan to look over it in the coming year and make some of the changes already mentioned above, but I think with any lesson we design, until I use it and take these characteristics into consideration, it is impossible for me to make a decision on what changes I need to make. 

3.  In the 3^rd chapter, Reiser distinguishes instructional media from instructional design, excluding teacher, chalkboards, and textbooks from the definition of instructional media.  Why?  Would you consider teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks instructional media?  Is the purpose of instructional design to incorporate media into instruction?

First, I think Reiser separates instructional media from instructional design so that we understand how each has evolved over the past century.  More often than not, we automatically assume that instructional media is included in instructional design, but he wants us to see the difference between the two.  As far as excluding teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks from the idea of instructional media, I think one of the reasons he does is because it is a given that teachers and textbooks will be part of instruction.  However, I think he is underestimating the influence of the teacher and textbook in a classroom.  This year I tried a few times to create videos of me presenting the material and having students watch them at home during the week before coming to class.  Many said they missed the extra things I added and stories that related in our discussions.  They did not necessarily say they disliked the videos, but wanted more information than what was presented in each one. 

Instructional design, as the history in this chapter portrayed it, seemed to more about how to design instruction rather than incorporating media, at least until the 1970s when the military began creating training material for their use in training personnel.  While Reiser mentions at the end of the chapter that the two overlap, it seemed that the history of design focused more on how it was thought up and not on the media used.  I think ultimately, we should look at how to incorporate media into the design of instruction.  Otherwise, the media may not lend any purpose or value to our instruction.