instructional design--unpacked

In the final days of this Fall 2009 semester, I returned to the course syllabus and realized that through this personal blog outlet, we were supposed to examine some questions that pertained to this subject matter: "What is technology? What does an 'instructional designer' do? How would you explain to your friends, work associates, or mother-in-law what it is that you are learning and what you will be able to do with your future degree?" I thought I'd utilize these extremely relevant questions as a framework to structure (what I believe will be) my final post related to this course.

What is technology? And I might add: How is it massaged into instructional design?

In our first day of this course, when asked what first comes to my mind when I think of technology, I wrote "computer" in my notebook. I now know that response to actually be rather narrow. Instead, technology is any tool that aids in the successful achievement of the instructional objectives. While a computer (hardware) and its related programs (software) may in fact represent a form of technology, it is just that--one form--and not an all-encompassing definition of the term. Flash cards, paper/pens, whiteboard/dry-erase markers, overhead transparencies, etc. all constitute various tools that an instructional designer may choose to utilize. Given this newfound denotation, it seems evident that instructional designers rely heavily on technology to satisfy the three paramount values: efficiency, effectiveness, and appeal. Of course, one could always design content that includes only lecture and/or discussion, but these values--in my opinion--are what inevitably link instructional design to technology. As a designer, you want to generate a product that is concise (i.e., efficient), competent (i.e., effective), and can captivate (i.e., appeal). Technology can facilitate and encourage these feats. But I contend that the designer must carefully consider which technology(ies) best suits his/her instructional project, as the temptation to automatically incorporate computer-aided instruction may prove unreliable or even detrimental to the overarching objectives.

What does an "instructional designer" do? How would you explain to your friends, work associates, or mother-in-law what it is that you are learning and what you will be able to do with your future degree?

In my handwritten notes on Sept. 29, I wrote that an instructional designer serves as a bridge between learning theory and teaching praxis. I might expand that to suggest that an instructional designer is a theorist, pragmatist, marketer, and a consultant all in one package! The ADDIE model necessitates the merger of these seemingly independent roles.

When in the Analysis stage, the designer becomes a theorist and considers the theoretical elements and descriptive actions of the instructional project: What will the participants learn? Why do they need to learn it? Where will they learn it? How will they know that they have learned it? Part of this contemplation involves a discussion about learning theory and which one(s) likely inform the resultant materials. For instance, a need that requires a mental, organizational component may contain some instruction that focuses on schema, or connection to prior knowledge. A need that asks the participant to create meaning or personalize the material may offer some hands-on activities that allow for experimentation and/or application. In the end, before he/she can determine the best pedagogical strategies to employ, the designer must first understand various learning theories and how they predict learning occurs in an individual.

Once in Design and Development of the instructional project, the designer transitions into a more pragmatic role. Who is our target audience? What makes these learning goals feasible? What technology(ies) can facilitate the broader objectives? How will instruction promote learning and achievement? At this point, the designer must ponder the precise pedagogical processes and protocols practiced in order to produce a product that parallels the primary values.

The instructional-designer-as-marketer "hat" emerges in Implementation. Here, he/she should understand the basic factors that influence adoption that Ev Rogers articulated: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability. For relative advantage, how does this product benefit the recipient (e.g., the instructor) or participants? In other words, why should the target audience want this product? For compatibility, how does this product conform to the target audience's lifestyle? For complexity, how difficult is it for the target audience to use/understand the product? For trialability, can the target audience experiment with the product before it actually adopts it? And for observability, how will others likely perceive the target audience for adoption of this product? At this stage in the ADDIE model, it seems to me that the instructional designer needs to be able to "sell" his/her product to the target audience he/she theoretically developed it for in the first place.

Finally, the instructional designer morphs into a consultant once he/she enters the Evaluation phase. Now it's time to be somewhat critical (or allow somebody else to be) of the initial product. What are the strengths of this product? Where can it be improved? How? With all of these roles that comprise the existence of an instructional designer, it becomes apparent to me that he/she must possess a patient attitude and mindset palatable to numerous ideas and suggestions.

And this is easier said than done. I'm much more accustomed to my own lesson plans, which is really just instructional design for myself, and that's much easier b/c I already know what I'm willing to try and what I'd rather avoid, and I have a pretty decent idea of what will and won't work with my students. That background knowledge/understanding really expedites the ADDIE model for my own teaching. But what we did in this course--an instructional design project for somebody else--requires much more consideration of potential circumstances and participants, mainly b/c you may not already know what or who they are! Indeed, it's been quite an illuminating experience for me.