The Relationship Between Instructional Design, Learning Theory, and Technology As I See It: My Personal Synthesis of this Week’s Readings
Instructional design is all about front-end analysis. Before you can design any kind of instructional program you have to analyze needs, the goals, the learners, the learning context, and the learning task in order to make informed decisions about the delivery of instruction. The art of instructional design is taking all of these pieces of information and fitting them together like a puzzle to come up with the optimal way to maximize learning. The tools that allow us to fit these pieces together are technology and learning theory. In this case, I use the term technology in the broadest sense. Technology is any device that supports learning. This ranges from a pencil, to a blackboard, to streaming audio, to discussion boards, to wireless handhelds, to the internet itself. There are myriad technologies with numerous levels of sophistication and usability. Each tool has different capabilities and can be used in different ways and in different situations. Learning theories are ways to describe how people learn and even what learning actually is. There are a number of different learning theories from behavioral, to cognitive, to positivist, to constructivist. In the past, experts have argued that each of these different theories was the sole explanation for how people learn. Emerging conventional wisdom suggests that all of these learning theories play a part in the overall picture and that each has something to contribute in the way of design elements for instruction (Anderson & Elloumi, 2004). When viewed through this structure, there is really no difference between face-to-face and online learning other than the tools. Analysis is still essential, and the tools selected must match the needs and goals of the learning task. The learning theory informs the tool selection as it applies to learner needs and desired outcomes.
This is essentially how I understood the reading from this week. The conclusion reached in the reading was that it is not the technology (delivery method) that determines the effectiveness of learning but, rather, how the learning is designed and implemented. What this says to me is that the available tools should be matched with corresponding learning theories that address the learning needs and goals of the instructional plan. This is true regardless of where instruction is delivered. In the online context, the available tools are different than they are in the onsite context. By making informed selections of tools and strategies based on the front-end analysis for an instructional plan, quality learning can be achieved. Compromises, trade-off, and adjustments need to be negotiated based on context and available technology. This means that sometimes online learning may not be a possible method of delivery and sometimes on site learning may not be a possible method of delivery, but usually it will just look different because of available technology. If learning theory and learner needs are considered in the plan, successful learning outcomes can be achieved in either context.
I am a big fan of the four contexts described by Bransford et al (1999) as a good way to encompass all types of learning theory into a plausible explanation for how people learn. Anderson (2004) calls the first context learning centered instead of learner centered. I like this perspective and the idea that every stakeholder in the learning process should be considered. This context encompasses the cognitive structures that the learner brings into the process and addresses the ways in which the instructor and the learner can utilize these to maximize learning. The knowledge centered context acknowledges the positivist view that knowledge structures or disciplines provide a framework or heuristic within which learning must take place. The assessment centered context recognizes the value of formative assessment as part of the learning process in which learners create meaning for themselves and the importance of scaffolding and monitoring on the part of the instructor in guiding the learning progress from both a constructivist and cognitive view of learning. The community centered context considers the role that social interaction plays in the mediation and construction of learning. These four perspectives provide a way of integrating the design of instruction with learning theory in a way that provides guidance for the selection of appropriate technology. It unifies the process. The concept map below illustrates my thought process on this concept. Thanks to John for helping me figure out how to get it uploaded. It's a little fuzzy but you get the idea.
Instructional design is all about front-end analysis. Before you can design any kind of instructional program you have to analyze needs, the goals, the learners, the learning context, and the learning task in order to make informed decisions about the delivery of instruction. The art of instructional design is taking all of these pieces of information and fitting them together like a puzzle to come up with the optimal way to maximize learning. The tools that allow us to fit these pieces together are technology and learning theory. In this case, I use the term technology in the broadest sense. Technology is any device that supports learning. This ranges from a pencil, to a blackboard, to streaming audio, to discussion boards, to wireless handhelds, to the internet itself. There are myriad technologies with numerous levels of sophistication and usability. Each tool has different capabilities and can be used in different ways and in different situations. Learning theories are ways to describe how people learn and even what learning actually is. There are a number of different learning theories from behavioral, to cognitive, to positivist, to constructivist. In the past, experts have argued that each of these different theories was the sole explanation for how people learn. Emerging conventional wisdom suggests that all of these learning theories play a part in the overall picture and that each has something to contribute in the way of design elements for instruction (Anderson & Elloumi, 2004). When viewed through this structure, there is really no difference between face-to-face and online learning other than the tools. Analysis is still essential, and the tools selected must match the needs and goals of the learning task. The learning theory informs the tool selection as it applies to learner needs and desired outcomes.
This is essentially how I understood the reading from this week. The conclusion reached in the reading was that it is not the technology (delivery method) that determines the effectiveness of learning but, rather, how the learning is designed and implemented. What this says to me is that the available tools should be matched with corresponding learning theories that address the learning needs and goals of the instructional plan. This is true regardless of where instruction is delivered. In the online context, the available tools are different than they are in the onsite context. By making informed selections of tools and strategies based on the front-end analysis for an instructional plan, quality learning can be achieved. Compromises, trade-off, and adjustments need to be negotiated based on context and available technology. This means that sometimes online learning may not be a possible method of delivery and sometimes on site learning may not be a possible method of delivery, but usually it will just look different because of available technology. If learning theory and learner needs are considered in the plan, successful learning outcomes can be achieved in either context.
I am a big fan of the four contexts described by Bransford et al (1999) as a good way to encompass all types of learning theory into a plausible explanation for how people learn. Anderson (2004) calls the first context learning centered instead of learner centered. I like this perspective and the idea that every stakeholder in the learning process should be considered. This context encompasses the cognitive structures that the learner brings into the process and addresses the ways in which the instructor and the learner can utilize these to maximize learning. The knowledge centered context acknowledges the positivist view that knowledge structures or disciplines provide a framework or heuristic within which learning must take place. The assessment centered context recognizes the value of formative assessment as part of the learning process in which learners create meaning for themselves and the importance of scaffolding and monitoring on the part of the instructor in guiding the learning progress from both a constructivist and cognitive view of learning. The community centered context considers the role that social interaction plays in the mediation and construction of learning. These four perspectives provide a way of integrating the design of instruction with learning theory in a way that provides guidance for the selection of appropriate technology. It unifies the process. The concept map below illustrates my thought process on this concept. Thanks to John for helping me figure out how to get it uploaded. It's a little fuzzy but you get the idea.
