LDES 5001 | Fall 2024 | Session 4: Design for Learning

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
LDES 5001 | Fall 2024 | Session 4: Design for Learning by Mind Map: LDES 5001 | Fall 2024 | Session 4: Design for Learning

1. Cognitive Load Theory (CLT)

1.1. What instructional strategies can we use in a classroom with neurotypical and neurodivergent learners? How do we ensure that our strategy factors in cognitive load for all various kinds of learners?

1.2. How can physiological measures be a key component of the CLT ?

1.3. What can be the role of the learner in managing their extraneous cognitive load, and is it a definite measure of mental load, one size fits all?

1.4. Throughout your education, do you feel like you've been able to tell when a class relies more on extraneous vs germane cognitive loads? What methods did your teachers use to focus on germane loads?

1.5. How does individual variability in prior knowledge and cognitive abilities affect the intrinsic load experienced by different learners?

1.6. Does cognitive overload cause a complete halt in learning, or does it reduce the learner's ability to operate at higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy?

1.7. Does the intense study method commonly referred to as "slam, jam, cram" align with the principles of CLT? What are the consequences of cognitive overload in this context?

1.8. What strategies can be employed to expand the capacity of working memory?

1.9. Considering CLT principles, how effectively do graduate instructional approaches support the learning process?

1.10. How do you see the three CLT types balancing backward learning? How do you see instructors testing CLT in backward learning?

1.11. Germane cognitive load focuses on desirable learning outcomes. How can I, a future instructional designer, create learning platforms that pushes learners to enjoy the challenge of deeply understanding the content for their learning goal?

1.12. I wonder what that external agent may look like, would it be assessed by another instructional designer? Or trained generative AI models? Are there established baseline standards that can be used to assess cognitive load? Essentially, where can we start in adapting learning designs with consideration to cognitive overload?

2. Technology

2.1. In what ways can technology be used to reduce extraneous load?

2.2. Given that teachers often have limited time for pedagogical reflection, what models or tools could be implemented in schools to foster continuous reflection without adding extra burden to the teacher?

2.3. While ongoing assessments are ideal for better tracking student learning, what tools could be implemented to make both assessments and feedback more efficient without increasing the teacher's grading time?

2.4. How might advanced technologies optimize cognitive load in class? Could they help balance the intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load?

2.5. What do studies suggest about the effects of instruction delivered via digital platforms in distance learning? How does distance learning impact intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load?

2.6. Artificial Intelligence

2.6.1. I do know that AI can be utilized as a tool for lesson planning, but I wonder what the limitations of using generative AI and effective design planning are.

2.6.2. Does generative AI decrease all levels of cognitive work load? Does it increase all levels of cognitive work load?

2.6.3. How would Backward Design, or Understanding by Design, practices look like with the incorporation of technologies and AI?

3. Backward Design (UbD)

3.1. How do the various aspects of understanding function? Do they contribute simultaneously to a mature understanding, or are they sequential, akin to the levels in Bloom's Taxonomy?

3.1.1. How do we assess these nuanced forms of understanding? Are traditional tests sufficient, or do they need to be supplemented with more authentic assessments?

3.2. How much can interpretation contribute to a learner’s understanding when the concept of an interpretation itself is rooted in subjective opinion?

3.3. Different students may achieve a certain desired result by different methods. When teachers apply backward design, how should they consider the differences among students?

3.4. How do we decide when to use backward design and design thinking as the analysis and design framework? Or, can I use both?

3.5. Have you used Backward Design before?

3.5.1. What are the potential limitations or drawbacks of backward design?

3.5.2. What do you see as drawbacks to backward learning? After reading Wiggins and McTighe's (2005) cautions, what do you think they should have included?

3.5.3. Have you found yourself in situations where the content, learning goals, and assessments were not well aligned?

3.6. How can we, as designers, know if the learning experiences we create are effective if we aren’t teaching them ourselves?

3.7. What strategies can be employed to accommodate diverse learner needs?

3.8. What does active and meaningful learning look like at different educational levels?

3.9. How can we facilitate multipartiality in the context of recent commitments to institutional neutrality?

3.10. Implementation

3.10.1. What resources—such as professional development, curriculum guides, and planning tools—are essential to support instructors in effectively implementing backward design?

3.10.2. I wonder how we could incorporate individualized learning, to meet the needs of every student, into this framework?

3.10.3. It would be useful to understand what strategies can instructors employ to balance the initial workload of backward design with their daily teaching demands.

3.10.4. Implementing backward design in U.S. K-12 schools may require a significant cultural shift. Is it realistic for public school teachers? For this approach to succeed, it demands a considerable amount of time in planning which most educators are not afforded. How can we approach this on a larger scale?

3.10.4.1. Are we focusing too much on the theoretical and experimental aspects of design? Have we completely disregarded the extraneous factors present in education, like limited resources, lack of support, students’ learning disabilities, language barriers, dysregulated behavior, and so much more?

3.10.4.2. In a context where national curricula often demand extensive coverage, how can we ensure that teachers prioritize what is essential without compromising meaningful student learning?

3.10.4.3. The book emphasizes that teachers should design curricula, learning experiences, and assessments to meet educational goals and evaluate student progress. In contrast, Dr. McGuire’s Teach Students How to Learn posits that student learning should be the top priority, suggesting that instructional design is less critical. Could these differing perspectives stem from the distinct developmental stages of college and high school students?

3.11. Assessment

3.11.1. I wonder, how might changing state-level standards and testing practices make the UbD approach to design more easily adoptable? Could these practices change to favor learning outcomes while still serving the function of informing state decision-makers on student progress?

3.11.2. Should we still have standardized tests/exams in the future? Based on the idea of "Backward Design" and the Nutrition class example, will it be possible that we may have more interdisciplinary courses (e.g. science rather than just biology or physics)?

3.11.3. In K-12 education in China, where the curriculum is determined by fixed government-designated textbooks and assessments are entirely based on these texts, teachers primarily concentrate on inputs. Is this a systemic issue, or is there room for adjustment at the level of individual instructional design?

3.11.4. What strategies or tools can I use to assess whether learners can empathize with other points of view? How can I also be empathetic to my learners?

3.11.5. In the case of self-knowledge, how can we test self-knowledge for groups?

3.12. Learners

3.12.1. To what extent do students understand the purpose behind their learning?

3.12.2. How would involving students in the curriculum-making process affect their learning? In other words, could knowing and developing essential questions and learning goals in tandem with teachers improve students’ abilities to achieve those goals, build understanding, and acquire skills/knowledge? And could that impact be observably larger than if the students were kept out of the explicit design process and not engaged explicitly with how the essential questions could influence content/activities in the classroom?

3.12.3. Would class discussions benefit students who are stubborn, close-minded, or display a lack of empathy?

3.12.4. How can we teach students early on to critically assess the sources and perspectives of curricula?