1. Mindmap maker: Joan Ren Shiqiong ID: 2013877672
2. Reflection ＆ Discussion
2.1. How would you address the argument of a trainer who says that it is the students' responsibility to be motivated to learn, not his responsibility to motivate the students?
2.1.1. I think it is better if students can motivate themselves intrinsically. This is because I think students being motivated by trainers have some problems. Firstly, some motivation may not be sustaining, especially those come from external reward. When rewards are canceled, the motivation might be "canceled" too. Secondly, it is difficult for instructors to nurture learners' intrinsic motivation. Although +ve feedback and providing students many options could help, instructors cannot always give +ve feedback and avoid -ve feedback on purpose. If learners or trainees can motivate by themselves through thinking the training as a way to enhance self autonomy and competence, I think it would be better
2.2. Do you think intrinsic motivation can be nurtured? Why or Why not? If yes, can you suggest some ways to nurture it?
2.2.1. I believe that intrinsic motivation can be nurtured because I think intrinsic motivation is sometimes due to one's need. Or in other words, your needs give reasons and base for how you behave. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, if my need is still on physiological, then I must be very motivated in struggling for food and drink. I think setting goals and making them be your motivators might be a way to nurture intrinsic motivation.
2.3. Some scholars argue that extrinsic rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation. What do you think?
2.3.1. Totally agree with that! This question reminds me of an very impressive story that I once read, talking about several teenagers playing poker at midnight. They made big noise so that the neighbours could't sleep. Neighbours tried different ways to stop them but none of the ways worked. Then someone had an idea. He began to pay those teenagers for playing poker at midnight, like 5 dollar per day. After one week, he suddenly stopped paying them. The teenagers were not satisfied with that and decided not to play poker at that time any more. From this story, I can see that at first, those teens are intrinsically motivated in playing poker because they just like playing that. However, the extrinsic rewards make the motivation become extrinsic (play poker for earning money). And I think motivation generated by this way is usually not sustaining, like what happened in the story.
3. Learning design (ADDIE Model)
3.1. Introduction to Instructional Design
3.1.1. About learning design
3.1.1.1. What's instruction
3.1.1.1.1. Delivery of information and activities that facilitate learners' attainment of intended, specific learning goals. (Smith & Ragan, 1993)
3.1.1.1.2. Instruction ≠ Education≠Training ≠Teaching
3.1.1.2. Concepts
3.1.1.2.1. As a system: A system of procedures for developing education and training programs in a consistent and reliable fashion.
3.1.1.2.2. As a process: A systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. (The University of Michigan, 1996)
3.1.1.3. Learning Design Model - ADDIE
3.1.1.3.1. Procedures (SYSTEMATIC)
3.1.2. ADDIE - Analyze (Needs Analyze）
3.1.2.1. What to do during Analyze
3.1.2.1.1. determined whether there is an instructional problem
3.1.2.1.2. needs assessment
3.1.2.1.3. objectives of the instructional program or product is established
3.1.2.1.4. project plan for design and development is laid out
3.2. Needs Assessment & Other analyses
3.2.1. ADDIE - Analyze Cont'd (Performance Analyze)
3.2.1.1. Why
3.2.1.1.1. To determine whether the performance gap is caused by lack of instruction (Instruction or non-instruction)
3.2.1.2. When gaps osccur: Identify problem causes (why nonperformance？)
3.2.1.2.1. Can't d
3.2.1.2.2. Won't do
3.2.1.3. Guiding tools
3.2.1.3.1. Mager & Pipe’s Flowchart
3.2.1.3.2. David Will's HTP Model
3.2.2. ADDIE - Analyze Cont'd (Task Analyze)
3.2.2.1. When
3.2.2.1.1. Existence of performance gaps (optimal-actual)
3.2.2.1.2. Gap (nonperformance) is caused by instructional problems
3.2.2.2. Why
3.2.2.2.1. To guide subsequence design
3.2.2.2.2. To identify training objectives
3.2.2.2.3. Identify bottom lines
3.2.2.3. What included
3.2.2.3.1. How a task or work is actually performed
3.2.2.3.2. Clarifies conditions needed for competent performance
3.2.2.3.3. Establishes minimum expectations
3.2.2.3.4. Tool - hierarchical task diagram
3.2.2.4. How
3.2.2.4.1. Survey experts﹣interview ＆ questionnaire
3.2.2.4.2. Convene experts
3.2.2.4.3. Observation of experts
3.2.2.4.4. Manual/books
3.2.3. ADDIE - Analyze Cont'd (Learner Analyze)
3.2.3.1. Why
3.2.3.1.1. If not, you're assuming all learners are alike
3.2.3.1.2. Learners are on the receiving ends
3.2.3.2. What included
3.2.3.2.1. Identify similarities and differences between among learners
3.2.3.2.2. Identify changing differences (values; belief etc.)
3.2.3.2.3. Analyze Prior knowledge
3.2.3.2.4. Analyze learner characteritics
3.2.3.3. How
3.2.3.3.1. Table suggested by Smith and Ragan
3.2.3.3.2. Cognitive Styles and their measures
3.2.3.4. Assumptions
3.2.3.4.1. Common errors
3.2.3.4.2. Important assumptions of all learners
3.3. Learning Theories
3.3.1. ADDIE - Design (About Learning )
3.3.1.1. What is learning (Jonassen, 2003)
3.3.1.1.1. Learning is a relatively permanent change in behavior
3.3.1.1.2. Learning is information processing
3.3.1.1.3. Learning is remembering and recalling
3.3.1.1.4. Learning is social negotiation
3.3.1.1.5. Learning is thinking skills
3.3.1.1.6. Learning is activity
3.3.1.2. 3 main theoretical models
3.3.1.2.1. Behaviorism
3.3.1.2.2. Cognitivism
3.3.1.2.3. Constructivism
3.4. Designing Instruction I
3.4.1. ADDIE - Design Cont'd （Learning Objectives）
3.4.1.1. Why objectives
3.4.1.1.1. clear communication of what will be learned
3.4.1.1.2. to inform the learner how they will demonstrate their learning
3.4.1.1.3. to communicate expectations to learners
3.4.1.1.4. to provide specifications for instructional products
3.4.1.2. Goal vs. Objectives
3.4.1.2.1. Goals
3.4.1.2.2. Objectives
3.4.1.2.3. Comparison chart
3.4.1.3. ABCD Model to write the objectives
3.4.1.3.1. A: audience
3.4.1.3.2. B: behavior
3.4.1.3.3. C: condition
3.4.1.3.4. D: degree
3.4.1.3.5. Example
3.4.2. ADDIE - Design Cont'd ( Motivation )
3.4.2.1. Definitions
3.4.2.1.1. the act of simulating or energizing an individual to act
3.4.2.1.2. A function of how much a person values a reward and his expectation of achieving it (Atkinson, 1957)
3.4.2.1.3. Motivation = Expectancy (students’ expectation of success) x Value (value that students place on a goal)
3.4.2.1.4. Motivation = Expectancy x Value/ Cause (by Dr Hew)
3.4.2.2. Types
3.4.2.2.1. Intrinsic
3.4.2.2.2. Extrinsic
3.4.2.3. Motivation Model - ARCS Model (Keller, 1987)
3.4.2.3.1. Attention
3.4.2.3.2. Relevance
3.4.2.3.3. Confidence
3.4.2.3.4. Satisfaction
3.5. Designing instruction II
3.5.1. ADDIE - Design Cont'd (Nine Events of Instruction)
3.5.1.1. Why
3.5.1.1.1. To sequence an instruction with a focus on attaining the learning outcomes
3.5.1.2. About 9 Instructional Events (Robert Gagné) & (University of Florida, 2014 )
3.5.1.2.1. Gaining attention
3.5.1.2.2. Informing learner of lesson objective
3.5.1.2.3. Stimulating recall of prior learning
3.5.1.2.4. Presenting stimuli
3.5.1.2.5. Guiding learning
3.5.1.2.6. Eliciting performance
3.5.1.2.7. Providing informative feedback
3.5.1.2.8. Assessing performance
3.5.1.2.9. Enhancing retention and learning transfer
3.6. Development and implementation
3.6.1. ADDIE - Development
3.6.1.1. Develop instructional materials
3.6.1.1.1. Materials type
3.6.1.1.2. Critical elements of materials and format (McArdle, 2011)
3.6.1.2. Factors that affect the quality
3.6.1.2.1. Time
3.6.1.2.2. Human Resources
3.6.1.2.3. Equipment
3.6.1.3. Set the standard of the instructional materials
3.6.1.3.1. Layout
3.6.1.3.2. Use of font
3.6.1.3.3. Screen design
3.6.1.3.4. Use of various media
3.6.1.3.5. According to cognitive theory, above elements would effect students' information processing. For example, larger font may catch more attention, and hence stimulate the transformation from sensory memory to short memory
3.6.2. ADDIE - Implemetation
3.6.2.1. Prepare for the implementation
3.6.2.1.1. Delivery of the instruction (McArdle, 2011)
3.6.2.1.2. Timetable & Schedule
3.6.2.1.3. enroll and notify the participants
3.6.2.1.4. select the support staff
3.6.2.2. Supported materials
3.6.2.2.1. street directory
3.6.2.2.2. important phone
3.6.2.2.3. nearby restaurant, washroom, fire exit, staff room, etc
3.6.2.2.4. book a site
3.6.2.2.5. scanner, printer
3.6.2.3. Implementation
3.6.2.3.1. pilot test
3.6.2.3.2. feedback from participants
3.6.2.3.3. on/off site observation
3.6.2.3.4. give enough time
3.7. Evaluation of training
3.7.1. ADDIE - Evaluation
3.7.1.1. Why
3.7.1.1.1. 1. evaluation of performace
3.7.1.1.2. 2. evaluation of instructional materials in design process
3.7.1.1.3. 3. evaluation of instructional materials in terms of their effectiveness
3.7.1.2. Evaluation of outcome：Kirkpatrick's 4 level model
3.7.1.2.1. Level 1 – Reaction
3.7.1.2.2. Level 2 – Learning
3.7.1.2.3. Training's two big challenges
3.7.1.2.4. Level 3 – Behaviour
3.7.1.2.5. Level 4 – Results
3.8. Overview
3.8.1. 7 principles of being good teachers (Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. 1987)
3.8.1.1. 1.Good Practice Encourages Student-Faculty Contact
3.8.1.1.1. helps students get through rough times and keep on working
3.8.1.1.2. enhances students' intellectual commitmenT
3.8.1.1.3. encourages them to think about their own values and future plans
3.8.1.2. 2. Good Practice Encourages Cooperation/ interaction among Students
3.8.1.2.1. Good learning is collaborative and social
3.8.1.2.2. Collaborative learning often increases involvement
3.8.1.2.3. Feedback and knowledge sharing improves thinking and deepens understanding.
3.8.1.3. 3. Good Practice Encourages Active Learning
3.8.1.3.1. Students do not learn much via teacher-centered pedagogy
3.8.1.3.2. Students should make what they learn part of themselves
3.8.1.4. 4. Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback
3.8.1.4.1. Students need feedback of performance to benefit from the course
3.8.1.4.2. Students need frequent activities and receive suggestions to make progress
3.8.1.5. 5. Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task
3.8.1.5.1. Time management is critical
3.8.1.5.2. Allocating realistic amounts of time means effective learning and effective teaching
3.8.1.6. 6. Good Practice Communicates High Expectations
3.8.1.6.1. Make extra efforts.
3.8.1.7. 7. Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning
3.8.1.7.1. Students need the opportunity to show their talents and learn in ways that work for them.
3.8.2. Blended learning
3.8.2.1. Rationale
3.8.2.1.1. online - time and space flexibility
3.8.2.1.2. CMC tools - Improve communication with students
3.8.2.1.3. Lower costs
3.8.2.2. IT tools
3.8.2.2.1. Asynchronous
3.8.2.2.2. Synchronous
4. Summary and reflection of additional reading
4.1. Reading 1 - Design and evaluation of two blended learning approaches: lessons learned
4.1.1. Reference
4.1.1.1. Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2011). Design and evaluation of two blended learning approaches: Lessons learned. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(8), 1319-1337.
4.1.2. Introduction
4.1.2.1. Blended learning
4.1.2.1.1. What?
4.1.2.1.2. Why?
4.1.2.1.3. Key considerations
4.1.2.2. Two approaches of blended learning introduced in this paper
4.1.2.2.1. One asynchronous communication + face to face tutorial + classroom discussion + reflection session (As Model one)
4.1.2.2.2. Two asynchronous communication tool + face to face tutorial (As Model two)
4.1.3. Model one : f2f tutorial with one asynchronous online discussion
4.1.3.1. Theoretical framework
4.1.3.1.1. GNOSIS framework
4.1.3.1.2. Teachers give students seed ideas and strategies through which students construct their own knowledge by integrating with others
4.1.3.2. Teaching strategy
4.1.3.2.1. Face to face tutorial and discussion
4.1.3.2.2. Asynchronous activities
4.1.3.2.3. Follow up activities
4.1.3.3. Evaluation
4.1.3.3.1. Tutor's perspective
4.1.3.3.2. Student's perspective
4.1.3.4. Contributions
4.1.3.4.1. Effective way to increase learning opportunities
4.1.3.4.2. Students are given equal opportunities, especial for those students who are why and who think a lot before answering
4.1.4. Model two: f2f tutorial and two asynchronous online discussion
4.1.4.1. Theoretical framework
4.1.4.1.1. Bloom's taxonomy
4.1.4.2. Rationale
4.1.4.2.1. Students think they fail to use or apply the design principles they learned in project design
4.1.4.2.2. Students need time to discuss the projects with their peers and get feedback
4.1.4.2.3. Aim of model two is to provide a better learning environment to solve those problems
4.1.4.3. Teaching strategies
4.1.4.3.1. Face to face tutorial
4.1.4.3.2. Asynchronous discussion #1 - review and critique previous students' projects
4.1.4.3.3. Homework #1 - draft design projects
4.1.4.3.4. Asynchronous discussion #2 - upload draft and initiate online discussion
4.1.4.3.5. Homework #2 - complete election table
4.1.4.3.6. Homework #3 - use reflection table to improve projects
4.1.4.4. Evaluation
4.1.4.4.1. Teacher's perspective
4.1.4.4.2. Student's perspective
4.1.4.5. Contributions
4.1.4.5.1. Effective approach for teachers to see whether students under the design principles
4.1.4.5.2. Asynchronous online discussion provide students a flexible way to interact with others
4.1.4.5.3. Students can develop critical thinking
4.1.5. Reflection
4.1.5.1. This paper really reminds me of another class about e-learning design. In that course, besides each week's f2f lesson, we had frequent discussion on topic questions. The result of online performance is automatically and quantitively calculated by the LMS system (cite moodle), which means the more you contribute to the online discussion, the higher marks u will get. To avoid postings which are not contributive to others' ideas, those posts like "agree with you" should add tag "social comments", and the system does not count scores for social cooments . Peers will remind each other if some of them do not add the tag to "social comment" . Also, one of the assignment is to design an e-learning course on cite moodle. Each of us enrolled into others' moodle class to give suggestions and feedback. I really think this blended learning pedagogy is good because it does encourages students like me who are too shy to speak and share knowledge in class to express ideas. Also, the interaction with peers helped me construct new ideas and observe whether there are any mistakes or drawback of my course design.But sometimes I also feel that this way of teaching gives me too much stress.Knowledge sharing and giving feedback become duties and tasks and my performance is evaluated completely by the amount of postings and comments.
4.2. Reading 2 - Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
4.2.1. Reference
4.2.1.1. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 31-48.
4.2.2. About multimedia learning
4.2.2.1. Rationale
4.2.2.1.1. Multimedia principle - people learn more deeply from words and pictures than from words alone
4.2.2.2. Multimedia instruction message
4.2.2.2.1. Definition: communication containing words and images intended to foster learning
4.2.2.3. Role of theory of learning in multimedia design
4.2.2.3.1. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning ﹣ Multimedia should be based on a theory of how people learn.
4.2.3. Three assumptions of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning
4.2.3.1. dual-channel assumption
4.2.3.1.1. Human have separate channels for processing visual and auditory information
4.2.3.2. limited capacity assumption
4.2.3.2.1. Only a few words can be held in auditory working memory at one time
4.2.3.2.2. Only a few features can be held in visual working memory at one time
4.2.3.3. active learning assumption
4.2.3.3.1. Meaningful learning occurs when learner engage in active processing of the presented material
4.2.3.3.2. Cognitive processes include selecting relevant material, organizing it into a coherent mental representation and integrating it with related material.
4.2.4. Three memory stores in multimedia learning - see details in ADDIE design->about learning->learning theories->cognitive learning
4.2.5. Five Processes in the cognitive theory of multimedia learning
4.2.5.1. selecting relevant words
4.2.5.1.1. Input: spoken verbal message
4.2.5.1.2. Output: is word sound base, a mental representation in the learner's verbal working memory of selected words or phrase
4.2.5.2. selecting relevant images
4.2.5.2.1. Input: pictorial portion of a multimedia message (briefly held in visual sensory memory)
4.2.5.2.2. Output: a visual image base, a mental representation in the learner's working memory of selected images
4.2.5.3. organizing words
4.2.5.3.1. Input: word sounds selected from the coming verbal message
4.2.5.3.2. Output: verbal model, a coherent representation in the learner's working memory of the selected words or phrases
4.2.5.4. organizing selected images
4.2.5.4.1. Input: visual images selected from the incoming pictorial message
4.2.5.4.2. Output: a pictorial model, a coherent representation in the learner;s working memory of selected images
4.2.5.5. integrating word-based and image-based representations
4.2.5.5.1. Input: pictorial model and verbal model
4.2.5.5.2. Output: integrated model, building connection, involving connection with prior knowledge (long-term memory)
4.2.6. Reflection
4.2.6.1. This paper links multimedia design and cognitive theory, which is very inspiring and useful to the development of instructional materials. Words and pictures of multimedia presentation are firstly received by audience as sensory memory. When words and images are organized, verbal and pictorial model are formed in audience' working memory. Finally, a integrating model combining both pictorial model and verbal model is formed in audience's long term memory, including prior knowledge and connections between corresponding portions. When designing multimedia products, if the design is in line with the process of how human brains deal with information, the multimedia message can be more meaningful and effective.
4.3. Reading 3 ﹣ How do instructional designers evaluate? A qualitative study of evaluation in practice
4.3.1. References
4.3.1.1. Williams, D. D., South, J. B., Yanchar, S. C., Wilson, B. G., & Allen, S. (2011). How do instructional designers evaluate? A qualitative study of evaluation in practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 885-907.
4.3.2. Background & so what?
4.3.2.1. Why evaluation is important in instructional design?
4.3.2.1.1. Evaluation is the key to create the best instruction possible under a given set of circumstances, which can hardly be viewed as optional or unnecessary.
4.3.2.2. However
4.3.2.2.1. In practice, some studies provide indirect evidence that evaluation is often not considered as the key.
4.3.2.2.2. Successful or expert design is often associated with careful analysis and appropriate learning objectives rather than formalized evaluation.
4.3.2.3. Therefore
4.3.2.3.1. In order to better understand how designers actually do and do not evaluate in practice, the authors attempted a more direct investigation of instructional designers' evaluation activities.
4.3.2.4. Prior studies
4.3.2.4.1. What they've examined
4.3.2.4.2. What they've offered
4.3.2.4.3. What they lack:
4.3.3. Research problem
4.3.3.1. In what ways, if at all, do designers incorporate evaluation into their everyday design practices
4.3.4. Methods
4.3.4.1. hermeneutics as a general philosophical position
4.3.4.1.1. Focus on on practical involvement and related experiences,part-whole relationships and an acknowledgement of the co-constitution of meaning
4.3.4.2. Phenomenological perspective
4.3.4.2.1. emphasized the development of themes and an overall thematic structure
4.3.4.3. Ethnography perspective
4.3.4.3.1. Interview practices
4.3.4.4. About Participants
4.3.4.4.1. three women and four men
4.3.4.4.2. drawn from three states in the western US
4.3.4.4.3. All worked in a high-volume design organization
4.3.4.4.4. Four were formally trained in instructional design (ID).Three were informally trained
4.3.4.4.5. All spend at least 75% of their time in design-related activities
4.3.4.4.6. At least have worker 8 years in the field of ID
4.3.4.5. Interview
4.3.4.5.1. The first interview
4.3.4.5.2. The second interview
4.3.4.5.3. The third interview
4.3.4.6. Data analysis - hermeneutic form of data analysis
4.3.4.6.1. reading all transcripts, looking for preliminary topics of relevance
4.3.4.6.2. refining the preliminary topics into more formal themes and then organizing them into an overall thematic structure;
4.3.4.6.3. selecting illustrative quotes from the transcripts to exemplify themes developed in step 2
4.3.4.6.4. comparing and contrasting themes to look for connections among them
4.3.4.6.5. considering each theme in light of the whole
4.3.4.6.6. considering the whole in light of each theme
4.3.4.6.7. examining the coherence of the overall thematic structure
4.3.5. Results - 10 themes regarding how designers use evaluation to improve their products
4.3.5.1. Theme 1: designers evaluate, usually informally
4.3.5.1.1. Participants rarely discussed formal external evaluation
4.3.5.1.2. In contrast, they questioned the feasibility of formal evaluation in their work.
4.3.5.1.3. They were not encouraged by clients or their own organizations to invest in serious formal evaluation.
4.3.5.2. Theme 2: evaluation of instructional design training
4.3.5.2.1. Designers evaluated their own schooling as well as informal training available on the job.
4.3.5.2.2. They also evaluated themselves as designers in light of the training
4.3.5.3. Theme 3: technology use involves evaluation
4.3.5.3.1. A major part of evaluation in instructional design involved continually weighing alternative technologies to help learners meet their goals
4.3.5.3.2. Such activities such as weighing involved informal evaluations of alternatives, even if designers did not call those activities evaluation
4.3.5.4. Theme 4: designers evaluate student learning
4.3.5.4.1. These designers built self-evaluation opportunities for learners into their instruction
4.3.5.4.2. The results of using these evaluation tools helped them modify the instruction and assist learners to adjust their learning activities.
4.3.5.5. Theme 5: self and team evaluation
4.3.5.5.1. Willingness to share insights and listen to feedback among team members
4.3.5.5.2. Informal evaluations engaged in many times a day and with no budget or formal planning involved.
4.3.5.6. Theme 6: design decisions and theory use involve evaluation
4.3.5.6.1. Evaluated various aspects of those situations to make effective decisions.
4.3.5.6.2. Participants suggest that for theory to be used at all, it must be evaluated for its potential helpfulness in particular situations
4.3.5.7. Theme 7: evaluating stakeholders’ needs
4.3.5.7.1. Instructional designers were aware of the important role of needs or audience analysis, but they were not always able to conduct adequate context evaluations
4.3.5.7.2. They felt hampered by clients who thought they already knew their needs and would not pay to have formal evaluations of needs done.
4.3.5.8. Theme 8: evaluating stakeholders’ priorities
4.3.5.8.1. Participants collaborated with team members, clients, goal statements, and their own emerging definitions to clarify a final evaluation focus.
4.3.5.9. Theme 9: evaluating stakeholders’ criteria
4.3.5.9.1. Building evaluations and subsequent design choices around multiple stakeholders’ values, criteria, and standards.
4.3.5.9.2. often involved negotiating among competing viewpoints, as recommended by many evaluation theorists
4.3.5.10. Theme 10: formative, summative and developmental evaluation
4.3.5.10.1. The participants and others did little, if any, formal formative or summative evaluation, though they encouraged and conducted internal, informal formative evaluation throughout the ADDIE process.
4.3.6. Implications
4.3.6.1. Those designers didn't think formal evaluation as an integral part of ID, they were not aware of the community of evaluators. Therefore they can hardly benefit from interacting with others (about evaluation experience)
4.3.6.2. Instructional design theorists and researchers could benefit from understanding how instructional design and evaluation theories are actually viewed and used in the world of everyday practice, as illustrated in this study.
4.3.6.3. Experiences of the designers presented in this article could provide other designers and project managers with alternative understandings of how to use evaluation theory and principles to develop better instruction
4.3.7. Self reflection
4.3.7.1. I'm really surprised that although we all know that Evaluation is very important in instructional design, still many designers rarely do any formal evaluation. Instead, during the ADDIE process, they use many informal evaluations. I‘ve never thought about the interaction with colleagues could be informal evaluation and even helped designers guide important decisions. Some research participants mentioned that they can have informal evaluation many times a day, however, they don't have much cost to spend on formal evaluation. But most importantly, I think what leads to the lack of formal evaluation is because designer didn't take it as an integral part of instructional design.
4.4. Reading 4 - Instructional Design - Strategies for Problem- Solving lessons
4.4.1. Reference
4.4.1.1. Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional design (p. 3). New York, NY: Wiley.
4.4.2. Example of Problem solving learning tasks
4.4.2.1. Construct geometry proof
4.4.2.2. Read music
4.4.2.3. Write computer programs
4.4.2.4. Plan and conduct an experiment
4.4.2.5. ...
4.4.3. Cognitive Requirements of Problem - solving learning
4.4.3.1. Ability to recall and apply relevant rules
4.4.3.1.1. To enable learner to select from and apply multiple rules, they need to know in which situation certain rules can be used to solve the "problems"
4.4.3.2. Ability to recall declarative knowledge
4.4.3.2.1. To enable learners understand the problem and limit the problem space
4.4.3.3. Ability to recall and apply cognitive strategies
4.4.3.3.1. To facilitate learners'
4.4.4. Instructional Events for a Problem-Solving Lesson
4.4.4.1. Introducing
4.4.4.1.1. Deploy Attention
4.4.4.1.2. Establish Instructional Purpose
4.4.4.1.3. Promote Interest and Motivation
4.4.4.1.4. Preview lesson
4.4.4.2. Body
4.4.4.2.1. Reviewing relevant prior knowledge
4.4.4.2.2. Processing information
4.4.4.2.3. Focusing Attention
4.4.4.2.4. Employing new learning strategies - if the strategies are ineffective
4.4.4.2.5. Practice - solve problems
4.4.4.2.6. Feedback
4.4.4.3. Conclusion
4.4.4.3.1. Summary and review
4.4.4.3.2. Transfer
4.5. Reading 5 ﹣ Seven Principles For Good Practice in Undergraduate Education
4.5.1. Reference
4.5.1.1. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE bulletin, 3, 7.
4.5.2. 7 Principles
4.5.2.1. Encourages Contact Between Students and Faculty
4.5.2.1.1. Important for students involvement and motivation
4.5.2.1.2. E.g. Freshman seminars & orientation
4.5.2.2. Develops Reciprocity and Cooperation Among Students
4.5.2.2.1. Learning is enhanced when it is more like a team effort than a solo race
4.5.2.2.2. E.g. Learning groups; Community of practice
4.5.2.3. Encourages Active Learning
4.5.2.3.1. Students do not learn much just by sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing prepackaged assignments, and spitting out answers
4.5.2.3.2. E.g. Structured exercises, challenging discussions, team projects, and peer critiques
4.5.2.4. Gives Prompt Feedback
4.5.2.4.1. Knowing what you know and don’t know focuses learning
4.5.2.4.2. E.g. Assessment feedback; just-in-time teaching
4.5.2.5. Emphasizes Time on Task
4.5.2.5.1. Learning to use one’s time well is critical for students and professionals alike
4.5.2.5.2. E.g. Workshops; intensive residential programs
4.5.2.6. Communicates High Expectations
4.5.2.6.1. Expect more and you will get more
4.5.2.6.2. E.g.bringing underprepared high school students to the university for workshops
4.5.2.7. Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning
4.5.2.7.1. Students good at one thing may be poor at another thing
4.5.2.7.2. E.g.Personalized systems --> let students work at their own pace
4.5.3. Self reflection
4.5.3.1. This paper reminds me of another paper written by John Biggs about teaching for enhanced learning. Biggs suggests that good teaching is "getting most students to use the higher cognitive level processes that the more academic students use spontaneously". Generally speaking, good teaching narrows the gap between so called "good" and "bad" students. Biggs paper is in line with the No.2, 3, 4 principles. Learning is enhanced when students are motivated to learn actively and cooperatively. I think the seventh principle is difficult to achieve because it is almost impossible for teachers to customize their teaching strategies to suit all students' ways of learning. But some researchers suggest to use flipped classroom in which students look learning materials at their own pace before the class and then in formal class they do hands on practice or collaborative work to reinforce learning.
5. Additional resources
5.1. How to make use of the advantages of ID ( G. M. Piskurich, 2006 )
5.1.1. 1. Cost effectiveness
5.1.1.1. If people are trained of what they think they need to know rather than what key people think they need to know -- waste time and money
5.1.1.2. ID won't solve all kinds of cost problems, but it at least helps you to ensure what is supposed to do and how to do it
5.1.2. 2. Time effectiveness
5.1.2.1. It helps you to provide training when it is needed and in a way that trainees can best use it
5.1.2.2. Include shortcuts
5.1.3. 3. Training Effectiveness Evaluation
5.1.3.1. Help you establish a solid evaluation of training effectiveness
5.2. Other ID Models
5.2.1. Merrill's First Principles of Instruction
5.2.1.1. what?
5.2.1.1.1. Most effective learning environment includes problem-based learning
5.2.1.1.2. Include 4 learning phrases
5.2.1.2. It assumes that learning is facilitated when...
5.2.1.2.1. learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
5.2.1.2.2. existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.
5.2.1.2.3. new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
5.2.1.2.4. new knowledge is applied by the learner
5.2.1.2.5. new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world.
5.2.2. Dick and Carey Model
5.2.2.1. What
5.2.2.1.1. Focus on interrelationship between context, content, learning and instruction
5.2.2.1.2. components are executed iteratively and in parallel rather than linearly
5.2.2.2. Key steps
5.2.2.2.1. Identify Instructional Goal
5.2.2.2.2. Conduct Instructional Analysis
5.2.2.2.3. Analyze Learners and Contexts
5.2.2.2.4. Write Performance Objectives
5.2.2.2.5. Develop Assessment Instruments
5.2.2.2.6. Develop Instructional Strategy
5.2.2.2.7. Develop and Select Instructional Materials
5.2.2.2.8. Design and Conduct Formative Evaluation of Instruction
5.2.2.2.9. Revise Instruction
5.2.2.2.10. Design and Conduct Summative Evaluation
5.2.3. Kemp's Instructional Design Model
5.2.3.1. What
5.2.3.1.1. Systemic and nonlinear
5.2.3.2. key elements
5.2.3.2.1. Identify instructional problems
5.2.3.2.2. Examine learner characteristics
5.2.3.2.3. Task analysis
5.2.3.2.4. Identify instructional objectives
5.2.3.2.5. Sequence content
5.2.3.2.6. Design instructional strategies
5.2.3.2.7. Plan the instructional message and delivery.
5.2.3.2.8. Develop evaluation instruments
5.2.3.2.9. Select resources to support instruction
5.3. ADDIE supplement
5.3.1. Needs analysis - steps to get started (McArdle, 2006)
5.3.1.1. Plan a preliminary and formal data gathering session
5.3.1.1.1. e.g. Generate training project agreement
5.3.1.2. Identify the types of data to gather
5.3.1.2.1. How will the training affect audience?
5.3.1.2.2. How will the training be accepted by key stakeholders
5.3.1.2.3. How will the training affect the organization
5.3.1.3. Create well-stated questions -- find the gap
5.3.1.3.1. Why don't people perform well
5.3.1.3.2. What performance level is desired
5.3.1.4. Gather information (mentioned in session 1)
5.3.1.5. Prepare to analyze the data - differentiate between two types of responses
5.3.1.5.1. teaching immediate job skill - training, OR
5.3.1.5.2. providing theories and knowledge for future - education
5.3.1.6. Develop a presentation to show your finding
5.3.1.6.1. Message you need to deliver
5.3.2. Evaluation - Summative and formative (Ragan & Smith, 1993)
5.3.2.1. Formative evaluation
5.3.2.1.1. What
5.3.2.1.2. Include
5.3.2.2. Summative evaluation
5.3.2.2.1. What
5.3.2.2.2. Steps
5.3.3. Design & develop & implement the program to fit the need (systemically)
5.3.3.1. Phase one
5.3.3.1.1. Develop training content
5.3.3.1.2. Develop graphics
5.3.3.1.3. Develop media needs
5.3.3.1.4. Develop lesson plans
5.3.3.1.5. Develop instructor guides
5.3.3.1.6. Evaluate needs
5.3.3.1.7. Analyze software needs
5.3.3.2. Phase two
5.3.3.2.1. Revise everything in phase one
5.3.3.3. Phase three
5.3.3.3.1. Conduct the test
5.3.3.3.2. Revise the training program
5.3.3.3.3. A second test if needed
5.3.3.4. Phase four
5.3.3.4.1. Pilot test a prototype
5.3.3.4.2. evaluate the pilot test
5.3.3.4.3. Identify required revisions
5.3.3.4.4. Revise and another test if needed
5.3.3.5. Phase five
5.3.3.5.1. Finalize the training program content
5.3.3.5.2. Produce the training program in final form