Learning Design and Technology

Short guideline how to write an interesting blog post

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Learning Design and Technology by Mind Map: Learning Design and Technology

1. 2. Reading suggested material

1.1. Ron and Susan Zemke(1984). 30 things we know for sure about adult learning

1.1.1. Motivation to Learn

1.1.2. Curriculum Design

1.1.3. In the Classroom

1.2. Wile, D. (1996). Why doers do.

1.2.1. 5 HP models

1.2.1.1. Gilbert's Model

1.2.1.2. Rossett's Model

1.2.1.3. Harless's Model

1.2.1.4. Spitzer's Model

1.2.1.5. Mager's Model

1.2.1.6. Comparing 5 Models

1.2.2. A new model

1.2.3. Three level of consulting language

1.3. Art Kohn.(2014).Brain Science: The Forgetting Curve–the Dirty Secret of Corporate Training

1.3.1. days after training

1.3.2. a week later

1.4. Wing Sum Cheung&Khe Foon Hew. Applying “First Principles of Instruction” in a blended learning course

1.4.1. Learning is promoted when learner are engaged in solving real- world problems.

1.4.2. Learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.

1.4.3. Learning is promoted when new knowledge or skill is demonstrated to the learner.

1.4.4. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is applied by learner.

1.4.5. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world.

1.5. M. David Merrill.A Pebble-in-the-Pond Model For Instructional Design

1.5.1. Pebble-in-the-Pond Development

1.5.2. Pebble-in-the-Pond is a viable alternative to traditional ISD and overcomes some of the major objectives raised

1.6. Hew, Khe Foon, and Wing Sum Cheung(2013). "Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice."

1.6.1. Brief description of Web 2.0 technologies

1.6.2. Methods

1.6.2.1. Sources of data

1.6.2.2. Data analysis

1.6.2.3. knowledge dimension

1.6.2.3.1. Factual knowledge

1.6.2.3.2. Conceptual knowledge

1.6.2.3.3. Procedural knowledge

1.6.2.3.4. Metacognitive knowledge

1.6.2.4. cognitive dimension

1.6.2.4.1. Remember

1.6.2.4.2. Understand

1.6.2.4.3. Apply

1.6.2.4.4. Analyze

1.6.2.4.5. Evaluate

1.6.2.4.6. Create

1.6.2.5. pedagogical approaches

1.6.2.5.1. Transmissive pedagogies

1.6.2.5.2. Dialogic pedagogies

1.6.2.5.3. Constructionist

1.6.2.5.4. Co-constructive

2. 1.Instructional design

2.1. Brief introduction to the instructional design

2.1.1. Brief history of instructional design

2.1.1.1. Edgar Dale’s (1946) Cone of Learning

2.1.1.2. B. F. Skinner (1954) The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching.

2.1.1.3. Bloom’s taxonomy(1956)

2.1.1.3.1. six levels within the cognitive domain

2.1.1.4. Gagne’s work —— Nine Events of Instruction

2.1.1.4.1. 1.Gain attention

2.1.1.4.2. 2.Inform learner of objectives

2.1.1.4.3. 3.Stimulate recall of prior learning

2.1.1.4.4. 4.Present stimulus material

2.1.1.4.5. 5.Provide learner guidance

2.1.1.4.6. 6.Elicit performance

2.1.1.4.7. 7.Provide feedback

2.1.1.4.8. 8.Assess performance

2.1.1.4.9. 9.Enhance retention transfer

2.1.1.5. The Dick and Carey model (1968)

2.1.1.5.1. The components of the Systems Approach Model, also known as the Dick and Carey Model

2.1.1.6. The ADDIE model, refined by Dick and Carey is very similar to the PLANE learning design

2.1.1.7. Sweller’s Cognitive Load Theory (1990s)

2.1.2. Analysis is the most important thing

2.1.2.1. Determined whether it is an instructional problem

2.1.2.2. The objectives of the instructional program

2.1.2.3. Needs assessment

2.1.2.3.1. What would you do?

2.1.2.3.2. How to get the information?

2.1.2.3.3. When do a NA?

2.1.2.4. A project plan for design and development is laid out.

2.2. Performance analysis and other types of analysis

2.2.1. Performance analysis

2.2.1.1. When a discrepancy exists between expected performance and actual performance—two possible explanations

2.2.1.1.1. Can’t do

2.2.1.1.2. Won’t do

2.2.1.1.3. Mager & Pipe’s flowchart

2.2.1.2. Main causes of won’t do problems

2.2.1.2.1. Causes of performance gaps: Wile’s model

2.2.1.2.2. Lack of support in work environment

2.2.1.2.3. Lack of resources

2.2.1.2.4. Lack of skills & knowledge

2.2.1.2.5. Lacking in inherent ability

2.2.1.3. Other resources

2.2.1.3.1. Model of process when performance gap is identified - Blanchard, P. N., & Thacker, J. W. (2010). Effective training: Systems, strategies, and practices. Pearson Education, Inc.: New Jersey

2.2.2. Task analysis

2.2.2.1. What

2.2.2.1.1. How a task or work is actually performed

2.2.2.1.2. Clarifies conditions needed for competent performance

2.2.2.1.3. Establishes minimum expectations or standards

2.2.2.2. How to conduct

2.2.2.2.1. Convene Expert panel

2.2.2.2.2. Observation of experts

2.2.2.2.3. Interview of experts

2.2.2.2.4. Survey of experts

2.2.2.2.5. Manuals / Books

2.2.2.3. Hierarchical Task Diagram

2.2.2.3.1. An example for learning to drive

2.2.2.4. Task analysis template

2.2.3. Learner analysis

2.2.3.1. Entry Behaviors

2.2.3.2. Prior Knowledge

2.2.3.3. Attitudes

2.2.3.4. Motivation

2.2.3.5. Education and Ability

2.2.3.6. Learning Preferences

2.2.3.7. Attitudes toward organization

2.2.3.8. Group characteristics

2.3. Learning theories

2.3.1. What is learning?

2.3.1.1. Definition(Jonassen, 2003)

2.3.1.1.1. Learning is a relatively permanent change in behavior

2.3.1.1.2. Learning is information processing

2.3.1.1.3. Learning is remembering and recalling

2.3.1.1.4. Learning is social negotiation

2.3.1.1.5. Learning is thinking skills

2.3.1.1.6. Learning is activity

2.3.1.2. 3 main theoretical models

2.3.1.2.1. Behaviorism

2.3.1.2.2. Cognitivism or cognitive information processing

2.3.1.2.3. Constructivism

2.4. Designing instruction I

2.4.1. Learning objectives

2.4.1.1. Learning goals vs. learning objectives

2.4.1.1.1. A goal may be defined as a desirable state of affairs. (Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1992, p.39)

2.4.1.1.2. Learning goals are simply expressions of the general results desired from instruction. Unlike learning objectives, they are not measurable.

2.4.1.1.3. Mager calls Goals “fuzzies” which need to be transformed into highly specific learning objectives which are concrete and can be observed.

2.4.1.2. Why objectives?

2.4.1.2.1. clear communication

2.4.1.2.2. inform the learner

2.4.1.2.3. communicate expectations

2.4.1.2.4. provide specifications

2.4.1.3. The ABCD approach of writing objectives

2.4.1.3.1. A:A udience (Can be part of the statement)

2.4.1.3.2. B:B ehavior (Performance)

2.4.1.3.3. C:C onditions (during Performance)

2.4.1.3.4. D:D egree (Criterion, Quality or Standard)

2.4.2. Events of instruction

2.4.2.1. Robert Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction

2.4.2.1.1. Gaining attention

2.4.2.1.2. Informing learner of objectives

2.4.2.1.3. Stimulating recall of prior learning

2.4.2.1.4. Presenting stimulus

2.4.2.1.5. Guiding learning

2.4.2.1.6. Eliciting performance

2.4.2.1.7. Providing informative feedback

2.4.2.1.8. Assessing performance

2.4.2.1.9. Enhancing retention and learning transfer

2.4.2.2. Comments on the Events

2.4.2.2.1. information-processing model of learning

2.4.2.2.2. behaviorist concepts to provide a more complete view of learning tasks (Molenda, 2002).

2.5. Designing instruction II

2.5.1. Five First Principles of Instruction

2.5.1.1. There are 5 first principles of instruction

2.5.1.1.1. Learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving problems” (Merrill, 2002, p.43).

2.5.1.1.2. Learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.” (Merrill, 2002, p.43).

2.5.1.1.3. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.

2.5.1.1.4. Learning is promoted when knowledge is applied by the learner

2.5.1.1.5. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world

2.5.2. 7 principles of good teaching

2.5.2.1. Good Practice Encourages Student-Faculty Contact

2.5.2.2. Good Practice Encourages Cooperation/ interaction among Students

2.5.2.3. Good Practice Encourages Active Learning

2.5.2.4. Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback

2.5.2.5. Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task

2.5.2.6. Good Practice Communicates High Expectations

2.5.2.7. Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning

2.6. Development and Implementation in ADDIE Model

2.6.1. Analyze

2.6.1.1. Validate the performance gap

2.6.1.2. Determine instructional goals

2.6.1.3. Confirm the intended audience

2.6.1.4. Identify required resources

2.6.1.5. Determine potential delivery

2.6.1.6. Compose a project management plan

2.6.2. Design

2.6.2.1. Conduct a task inventory

2.6.2.2. Compose performance objectives

2.6.2.3. Generate testing strategies

2.6.2.4. Calculate return on investment

2.6.3. Develop

2.6.3.1. Generate content

2.6.3.2. Select or develop supporting media

2.6.3.3. Develop guidance for the student

2.6.3.4. Develop guidance for the teacher

2.6.3.5. Conduct formative revisions

2.6.3.6. Conduct a Pilot Test

2.6.4. Implement

2.6.4.1. Prepare the teacher

2.6.4.2. Prepare the student

2.6.5. Evaluate

2.6.5.1. Determine evaluation criteria

2.6.5.2. Select evaluation tools

2.6.5.3. Conduct evaluations

2.7. Technology support learning

2.7.1. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education(Arthur W. Chickering and Zelda F. Gamson)

2.7.1.1. 1. Good Practice Encourages Student-Faculty Contact

2.7.1.2. 2. Good Practice Encourages Cooperation among Students

2.7.1.3. 3. Good Practice Encourages Active Learning

2.7.1.4. 4. Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback

2.7.1.5. 5. Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task

2.7.1.6. 6. Good Practice Communicates High Expectations

2.7.1.7. 7. Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning

2.7.2. Web 2.0 technology

2.7.2.1. Wiki

2.7.2.2. Blog

2.7.2.3. WebQuest

2.7.2.4. Google Forms

2.7.2.5. Delicious

2.7.2.6. Audacity

2.7.2.7. Diigo

2.7.2.8. Photostory

2.7.2.9. Voicethread

2.7.2.10. Voki

2.7.2.11. Prezi

2.7.2.12. Mindmap

2.8. Evaluation of Training programs

2.8.1. Evaluation of outcome

2.8.1.1. 4 levels (adopted from Kirkpatrick, 1998)

2.8.1.1.1. Level 1

2.8.1.1.2. Level 2

2.8.1.1.3. Level 3

2.8.1.1.4. Level 4

2.9. Summary and reflections

2.9.1. summary

2.9.1.1. Learning Theory

2.9.1.1.1. Behavioral Cognitivism Constructivism

2.9.1.2. Instructional Theory

2.9.1.2.1. Conversation (discussion)

2.9.1.2.2. Elaboration (step)

2.9.1.2.3. Gagne’s nine events of instruction (sequence)

2.9.1.2.4. Bloom’s Taxonomy

2.9.1.3. Cognitive Domain

2.9.1.4. Affective Domain

2.9.1.5. Gagne’s nine events of instruction

2.9.1.6. Instructional Design Model

2.9.1.6.1. ASSURE MODEL

2.9.1.6.2. WATER model

2.9.1.6.3. Dick and Carey system approach

2.9.1.6.4. KEMP design model

2.9.2. Reflections

2.9.2.1. After finishing in this module, in terms of what I learn, a lot of learning models for me are benefited, especially for ADDIE model and ASSURE model learned in last session.Before designing a course, we need to analyze my learners by taking their different learning styles and prior knowledge of students into account.And in the end we are recommended to evaluate whether or not the lesson objectives were met. It provides a step-by-step process which is an asset to the school,teachers and students.To be more specific,it helps instructional designers create a training framework in order to make sure their courses or products are as effective as they possibly be. I believe these kinds of models would promote teaching and learning.

3. 3. Additional resources

3.1. The Use of Traditional Instructional Systems Design Models for eLearning

3.1.1. Morrison, Ross, and Kemp Model (Classroom-oriented)

3.1.1.1. The Morrison, Ross and Kemp model is classroom-oriented and describes a holistic approach to instructional design that considers all factors in the environment. This model prescribes a process that is iterative and subject to constant revision. This extremely flexible model is designed to focus on content and appeal to teachers (Prestera, 2002, p. 4).

3.1.1.2. three elements that differentiate it from some other models:

3.1.1.2.1. instruction is considered from the perspective of the learner

3.1.1.2.2. the model takes a general systems view towards development with instructional design being presented as a continuous cycle

3.1.1.2.3. the model emphasizes management of the instructional design process

3.1.1.3. Attention of using this kind of model:

3.1.1.3.1. an individual with little instructional design skill could perform minimal front end analysis and develop a piece of instruction using few or no additional resources.

3.1.2. Seels and Glasgow Model (Product-oriented)

3.1.2.1. This division allows a project to be planned, resourced, and managed as three phases.

3.1.2.2. When to use?

3.1.2.2.1. project planning

3.1.2.2.2. resource allocation

3.1.2.2.3. the control of the product development cycle

3.1.3. Dick and Carey Model (Systems-oriented)

3.1.3.1. The systems-oriented Dick and Carey model details an iterative process that is applicable across a range of context areas.

3.1.3.2. This model is perhaps the most well known of the systematic design models and is ìthe standard to which all other ID models

3.1.4. Summary of the Models

3.1.5. Comparing Factors in the Models Related eLearning

3.2. Cathy Moore's Action Mapping

3.2.1. Definition

3.2.1.1. Action Mapping is a quick, effective, and visual way to design compelling learning experiences for instructional products including eLearning, simulations, and in person training events.

3.2.2. Map

3.3. Top eLearning Tools

3.3.1. Adobe® Captivate

3.3.2. Articulate® Storyline

3.3.3. Lectora® Inspire

3.3.4. Udutu™

3.3.4.1. For free!!!

3.3.5. SmartBuilder

4. 4. Additional reading and reflections

4.1. Abreena W. Tompkins, (2007).Brain-Based Learning Theory: An Online Course Design Model

4.1.1. Methodology

4.1.1.1. Conceptual Framework

4.1.1.2. Theoretical Framework

4.1.1.3. Analytical Framework

4.1.2. Results

4.1.2.1. Theoretical brain-based online course design model addresses the model

4.1.2.2. IGNITE Model

4.1.2.2.1. Intervals: Provide intervals of intense focus with frequent breaks

4.1.2.2.2. Grouping: Chunk everything possible in groups of 3-5

4.1.2.2.3. Novelty: Use novelty, variety, humor, and frequent change

4.1.2.2.4. Interconnectedness: Connect, engage, experience/demonstrate, revisit

4.1.2.2.5. T²: Integrate technology integration; allow time for processing with depth and quality

4.1.2.2.6. Environment: Demonstrate the value of affective atmosphere in teaching/learning

4.1.3. Reflection

4.1.3.1. The IGNITE Model is very impressive,it brought me so many inspiration in our group design.

4.2. Dave S. Knowlton, Julia Simms,(2010). Computer-based instruction and generative strategies: Conceptual framework & illustrative example

4.2.1. Aims

4.2.1.1. Therefore, mathematics educators struggle to create efficient and relevant learning experiences for adult math students (Wedege, 1999). This article aims to begin filling this gap in the literature.

4.2.2. The needs of adult learners

4.2.2.1. Adult students find computers to be an increasingly important component of their educational endeavors

4.2.2.2. Adult students prefer learning activities that are active and investigational

4.2.2.3. How to meet the needs of adults?

4.2.2.3.1. Computer-integration strategies

4.2.2.3.2. Design approaches

4.2.3. Drawbacks of using CBI and ISD in higher education settings

4.2.3.1. Using ISD to design CBI is quite time consuming

4.2.3.2. While we are advocates of ISD, we are concerned that it often becomes little more than a euphemism for Direct Instruction in its worst sense

4.2.3.3. We are concerned that designers resort to the common method of drill-and-practice in the name of making CBI more efficient

4.2.4. Reflection

4.2.4.1. We need realize that sometime we are required to break out of routine like this paper said. Select a suitable way for designing, even for doing anything in the daily life.