ID+Model+Report

ID Model Report in PDF Format: ID Model Report in Word Format: ID Model Report in Pages Format:

Text of ID Model Report __Introduction:__ New technologies and the possibilities that such tools hold for the process of teaching and learning demand a new way of thinking about how we learn and construct meaning from knowledge. New technologies demand new models of Instructional Design for how we teach, and how we learn. Models of Instructional Design that are more mechanistic and reflective of behaviorist philosophies are not ideally suited for the development of online learning platforms because their philosophies are not ideally suited for learning environments that are constructivist in nature. Constructivism posits that learning is a process of developing understanding and creating meaning. This cycle is iterative, but the meanings generated are not; as the understandings that one reaches may shift over time. Constructivist learning environments promote knowledge innovation rather than fact memorization (Lebow, 1993; Joannassen & Reeves, 1996, as cited in Oliver, 2000, p. 3). In a keynote address to the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education in 2000 Ron Oliver asked: “Is it possible to specify design guidelines from which instructional designers can generate Web-based learning settings that exemplify constructivist learning settings?” (Oliver, 2000, p. 4). __Building an Online Wisdom Community:__ In Building an Online Wisdom Community: A Transformation Design Model (2004) authors Gunawardena, Jennings, Ortegano-Layne, Frechette, Carabajal, Lindemann, and Mummert have answered Oliver, proposing FOCAL, a new model of Instructional Design for online education, based upon socio-constructivist learning theory. The FOCAL (Final Outcome Centered on Learner) model consists of three dimensions within the online learning environment: a Wisdom Community, Knowledge Innovation, and Mentoring and Learner Support (Gunawardena, et al., 2004, p. 40). The authors cite a need for this new model, as traditional ADDIE-based models of instructional design are reflective of behaviorist psychology and do not provide an adequate framework for the development of online socio-constructivist learning environments (Ibid, p. 42). The FOCAL model is centered upon the idea of an online wisdom community. Bringing participants together to create such a community results in a synergism wherein individual participants would come together to form a greater whole (Ibid, p. 45). The model provides that instructional designers develop an supportive, respectful online environment that promotes a common goal and the empowerment of those participating in the learning process. (Ibid, p. 47). Mentoring and scaffolding for learner support is also integral to the FOCAL model (Ibid). __Instructional Design for Building Online Wisdom Communities:__ In New Model, New Strategies: Instructional design for building online wisdom communities (2006) authors Gunawardena, Ortegano-Layne, Carabajal, Frechette, Lindemann and Jennings have given FOCAL an overhaul, transforming it into a new model for Instructional design called WisCom. The model is based on a Cycle of Inquiry module design, and a Spiral of Inquiry program design, emphasizing the cyclical, iterative, life-long nature of the process of learning (Ibid, p. 218). Drawing on socio-cultural and socio-constructive learning theories, WisCom was developed as a community-centered model whose purpose was to “design learning environments for ill-structured knowledge domains” (Jonassen, 1997, as cited in Gunawardena, et al., 2006, p. 219). The WisCom model’s Spiral of Inquiry program design is composed of three essential dimensions: The wisdom community, mentoring and learner support and knowledge innovation which potentiate transformational learning (Gundawardena, et. al, 2006, p. 222). Through the integration of these three dimensions WisCom aims to create environments where students can learn by negotiating meaning and understandings as a community of practice (Ibid, p. 220). The model emphasizes mentoring and learner support as key to the process of building a supportive community of learners (Ibid, pp. 220-221). Learning is enhanced by this process of mentoring within the wisdom community as participants engage in a process of knowledge management that goes beyond the mere aggregation of facts in the process of knowledge innovation: “the purposeful creation, sharing and preservation of meaningful, socially constructed ideas” (Ibid, p. 221-222). The Cycle of Inquiry module design of WisCom incorporates five steps to achieve a learning goal or solve a problem within WisCom’s three-dimensional Spiral of Inquiry program design (Ibid, 223-227). The Cycle starts with the problem, issue, or learning goal, from which the community begins an initial exploration. Additional resources and multiple perspectives are then presented, potentiating learners to examine and reflect as group to come up with a shared understanding from which they can then work on a new problem, issue or learning goal (Ibid). __Paradigm Shift: from Behaviorsim to Constructivism in Instructional Design__ Early online distance education opportunities were mostly independent learning activities, wherein participants completed a set of rote tasks or completed individualized educational objectives with little to no interaction with other participants. One watched a pre-recorded lecture, read the textbook, completed the online tests and quizzes and gained very little in terms of authentic or transformative learning. Basically, they were one-way transfers of knowledge wherein the learner was the receiver of the instructor’s knowledge, not the creator (Grabinger, 1996, p. 667, as cited in Oliver, 2000, p. 3). It was a very passive way, mechanistic way of learning. Push the button, pull the string, be a cretin, not a creator. Web 2.0 technologies enable more interactive, collaborative opportunities for online learning in constructivist settings. Learning is a discussion, not a lecture. The challenge of developing a model for the design of Constructivist Learning Environments can be daunting. Cunningham, Duffy and Knuth (1993) posit Constructivist Learning Environments are those that simultaneously provide for the following seven pedagogical aims in that they 1) accommodate and provide for experience with multiple and diverse perspectives 2) actuate experience in the process of knowledge construction 3) situate learning in a context with relevance to the ‘real world’ 4) stimulate ownership and responsibility for learning with confident self-expression 5) frame learning in social and collaborative environment 6) foster the utilization of varied classes of representation and 7) foster self-actualization as part of the learning process (as cited in Oliver and Herrington, 2003, p. 113). While traditional methods of Instructional Design may be able to provide for these goals, they were not developed as models for online learning with such pedagogical goals in mind. Rather than fostering independent thought, such models do a better job of training or accomplishing more behavioristic goals in that they can help elicit a desired response to a given stimulus or situation. The WisCom model, on the other hand, appears ideally suited to developing online socio-constructivist learning environments. __Evaluation: Can the WisCom Model Work in My Real World?__ What is the point of learning that does not serve some real-world goal or purpose outside a classroom or learning objective? What does one really learn if they cannot share it with others? What is the point of theory if that theory is not put into practice? Why ask questions when one only wants to hear their own answer echoed back to them? At some point theory seems to divorce itself from practice; the aim of instructional designers should be to reconcile the two. That is why I chose these two articles, after perusing Google Scholar and Ebsco host through the University of Florida’s Library Remote Accesss. Educators and instructional designers should view themselves as active participants in the cycle of learning. They are not outside the system, they are an integral part of that system which should adapt to changing times and shifting paradigms. I think WisCom is ideally suited to develop platforms for online education; both formal and informal. The cyclical, adaptive characteristics of the WisCom model allow it to be easily adapted to a variety of learning goals and content areas. Conclusion: Wisdom is more than simply knowing something; it is knowing what to do with what one knows. Wisdom implies choice, a freedom to choose how to apply what one knows in a given context or situation; without the ability to freely choose among alternative actions and choices wisdom would amount to nothing more than blind obedience. While some educators may prefer that their students be blindly obedient, knowledge does not belong in a vacuum; it must be used, tried, tested, and acted upon before knowledge can be deemed wisdom. Moreover, wisdom is dependent upon the cultural context in which it is exhibited (Sterberg & Grigorenko, 2004, p. 1427). Wisdom demands a community, a place to share what is known and how one might use it; a wisdom community.

__Citations:__

Drexler, Wendy, Baralt, Anna & Dawson, Kara (2008). The Teach Web 2.0 Consortium: a tool to promote educational social networking and Web 2.0 use among educators. Educational Media International, 45(4), 271-283. http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/09523980802571499, doi: 10.1080/09523980802571499

Gunawardena, C., Ortegano‐Layne, L., Carabajal, K., Frechette, C., Lindemann, K., & Jennings, B. (2006). New Model, New Strategies: Instructional design for building online wisdom communities. Distance Education, 27(2), 217-232. http://search.ebscohost.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu, doi:10.1080/01587910600789613

Gunawardena, C. N., Jennings, B., Layne, O. L. C., Frechette, C., Carabajal, K., Lindemann, K., and Mummert, J. (2004). Building an online wisdom community: A transformational design model. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2): 40-62. http://www.springerlink.com/content/8412534284nnhj8r/, doi: 10.1007/ BF02940929

Oliver, R. (2000). When Teaching Meets Learning: Design Principles and Strategies for Web-based Learning Environments that Support Knowledge Construction. Keynote Speech ASCILITE conference. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/ron_oliver_keynote.pdf

Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2003). Exploring Technology-Mediated Learning from a Pedagogical Perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 11(2), 111-126. http:// search.ebscohost.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu, doi: 10.1076/ilee.11.2.111.14136

Sternberg, R. & Grigorenko, E. (2004, September). Intelligence and Culture: How Culture Shapes What Intelligence Means, and the Implications for a Science of Well-Being. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), 1427-1434 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4142145, doi: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1514