Lauren Pressley's Instructional Design Blog

information literacy resources

2005-05-03T22:53:00.000-04:00

Guidelines for Instructional Programs in Academic Libraries. Association of College and Research Libraries, 2003.

This document defines IL as "identifying an information need, accessing needed information, evaluating, managing, and applying information, and understanding the legal, social, and ethical aspects of information use." The document gives a general overview of program structuring and implications for evaluation, human resources, and support structures (including instructional facilities, instructional support facilities, financial support, and support for continuing education, training, and development).

Characteristics of Programs of Information Literacy That Illustrate Best Practices: A Guideline. Association of College and Research Libraries, 2003.

This document traits (divided into 10 categories) that describe features in information literacy programs that are best practices. There are links throughout the document explaining more information.

Objectives for Information Literacy Instruction: A Model Statement for Academic Librarians. Association of College & Research Libraries, Instruction Section, 2001.

The document lists competency standards for information literacy programs. Each competency standard lists performance indicators. Each performance indicator includes outcomes (discussed as goals and tasks within our course). This is an extremely thorough document. It includes an appendix summarizing competencies.

Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning: Standards and Indicators. American Association of School Librarians, Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 1998.

This document is aimed at K-12 education, but many of the principles could be applicable to information literacy at the college level. The document provides guidelines for determining what "information literacy" means in terms of the student. This document also ahs general categories, broken-down into standards, broken-down into indicators.

Cited Resources

Gradowki, Gail, Snavely, Loanne, and Dempsy, Paula, eds., Designs for Active Learning: A Sourcebook of Classroom Strategies for Information Education. Chicago: American Library Association, 1998.

Branch, Katherine, et al., eds. Sourcebook for Bibliographic Instruction. Chicago: American Librarian Association, Association of College & Research Libraries, Bibliographic Instruction Section, 1993.

Reflections on my participation in “LIS” 672, Instructional Design

2005-05-03T17:15:00.000-04:00

Self-evaluation

I signed up for this course not knowing what I was getting myself into. All I knew was that I was leaning towards information literacy at a college level, and this class looked like the “best fit” for those skills in the LIS catalog. When I started the class I realized that I was going to learn an awful lot: it seemed that everyone was teaching and working on a PhD in education! (Now I realize I wasn't quite so alone... it just really felt like it at the time!)

I was most at home during those first, most theoretical, weeks. Since then I've been more sequential and precise than my previous education (philosophy, communication, and women's studies) require. I've learned a lot from classmates about educational theory and feel that the knowledge will be useful when I'm working on developing my own class.

As we got further and further into our individual projects I felt less and less part of the class. I did think that the projects were very useful to illustrate what we were learning (I doubt I would have understood what was meant by "task" without having comments on my project), but it also slightly separated the class into segments, sending us in our own directions. I think this is alright when it happens in class that are primarily lecture-based, but I felt that this individualized directions distracted most people from the discussions, which limits learning in a conversational-based class.

As the discussions dwindled, I participated a little bit less, too. I did work on my own, however, reading Learning as a Way of Being and Orality and Literacy, and pouring over Information Literacy sites (including several from the American Library Association). These activities weren't directly part of my class experience, but they were an important part of my perspective as I went through class, particularly during those weeks when I felt that I had less to contribute.

My personal expectations

I feel that I did use my inner resources and applied them well. I didn't have the classroom experience that a lot of folks had, but I do have a lot of experience supervising students, and helping them learn how to do their job. When I had something of value to add I always put it out there. (This is something that I rarely feel comfortable doing in a lecture-style classroom.)

I feel that I did meet my own expectations. I participated as fully as I felt that I was able to do. I added resources that I thought were relevant. I made use of class resources and blogs.

Design evaluations

If I were to begin the course with the knowledge I have now, I would probably consider doing a little background learning before the course, even if it were just going to coffee with a teacher-friend to get some basic theory under my belt, before getting started. After getting involved with my MLIS degree (where almost no one has a background in the subject matter) I'm used to a lot of background as part of any course. If I had fully understood this was an education class, I would have put forth some effort in the weeks beforehand to understand basic principles (such as constructivism). I don't think it hurt me to learn on the fly, it just was a little intimidating.

I also think that if I were to do this class again I would choose a project that was a little broader. When I came into the class I didn't have any foreseeable role in designing a course, so I picked the next best thing: a presentation. However, if I had known that I was going to be getting involved with the LIB100 classes at WFU I would have applied the project to that course. (I’d particularly consider the use of journaling a la Sue.) I think that this would give me a little more similarity in background to other classmates and would give me a better project to fully illustrate the concepts we learned.

reflections, with two weeks to go.

2005-04-25T22:29:00.000-04:00

So, in the final weeks of the ID class, we’re reflecting on what we’ve learned and thought about throughout the course.

Fortunately, for me, I didn't have a clear picture of instructional design before I started this course. I knew it probably had to do with designing curriculum and probably a correlating presentational scheme. Beyond that I had no idea; I had plenty of room to grow. I've found the framework of the course to be useful, the “ID Power Train” includes useful tools, I've gotten a better idea of educational theory, and I've learned about concepts that help with instructional design. So this course has created a foundational image of ID for me, on which I can, hopefully, build.

I was expecting more about theory and less about specifics (such as "how to incorporate a specific technology into a curriculum" etc.). Until the “ID Power Train” the material fit that expectation (which was great... exactly what I expect graduate education to be). Once we started with the “ID Power Train” I felt that the course was much more like undergraduate courses, filled with specifics that might change in light of new research. I do think the “ID Power Train” is useful, but I also missed the theory we were talking about earlier on. On a side note: I felt that the theory could be applied across the spectrum. It doesn’t matter if you’re working with K-12 kids or college students, teaching math or information literacy, brain research or postmodern criticisms can apply. Once we got down to the nitty-gritty of the “ID Power Train” and specific projects, I felt much more disconnected from my classmates… we were all working on such different topics. (I don’t think this was all bad. Though there was a disconnect, there were still elements in common—remember this paper is a cloud?—it just took a lot more work to find the similarities.)

My work situation continues to add opportunities to use the instructional design concepts for instruction. Currently I'm (essentially) a TA for one section of LIB 100 at Wake Forest University. Next fall I'll be co-teaching with a coach in the room. Hopefully, after that, I'll be co-teaching just like the rest of the instructors. There will be increasing opportunities to use instructional design ideas in the courses I'm involved with. I've picked up several things I'd love to incorporate, too (such as pretesting).

I plan to continue to read up on information literacy, which will give me the librarians’ perspective, but I also know that I will want to keep up with instructional design as an independent field. My gut is that I will look in journals and read relevant articles, but I’d like to also attend training sessions at conferences, etc.

I think, at this point anyway, I need to be able to use instructional design in a more regular way. It will be useful to me to be teaching, because that will help me really learn what we've discussed and the course reading. However, I'm sure that actually using instructional design on a regular basis will just raise more questions.

(Oh, and I'm a postmodernist in most ways. Though I like the “ID Power Train” in some ways, and I like that it forces me to focus on tangible skills, I also am too confluent to love it, so there will always be a little pomo in me.)

librarianship concept map

2005-04-19T17:32:00.000-04:00

I was so inspired by the use of concept maps earlier this semester, that I thought I'd do one of my general interests in librarianship and the connections that I see at this point in time. I started out just doodling on a page of paper, but realized that in mapping it out I'm able to better articulate what I find important and interesting in librarianship. It'll be interesting to see how this changes over the next two years, as I move through the MLIS program (and afterwards, in the professional world)!

For full size concept map, click here.

learning styles vs. prior knowledge

2005-04-18T17:11:00.000-04:00

Hannum’s presentation was a bit more controversial this week! His presentation basically argued that when teachers pay attention to learning styles, they’re wasting their time. He said that research gives little indication that students learn more when teachers match instruction to their learning styles students will learn significantly more.

I’d like to see more of the research. One of the main studies cited compared visual and audio learners when using video and audio tapes. I was skeptical of the research immediately, because both video and audio tape relies heavily on audio learning (though the video tape was supposed to be better for visual). It turned out that my concerns didn’t matter because not only did visual and audio learners not do significantly differently with the “preferred” medium, audio and visual learners did about the same with both media.
Though, I did find it interesting that using multimedia was more effective across the board than just using audio or video tape. I think at this point I’d be interested in seeing the difference with a significantly different learning style, such as reading or interacting with the computer, though I suspect the results would be similar.

So, Hannum makes the charge that it’s a waste of time to use learning styles as a variable we consider how we’ll teach. He suggests what seems to be a very “back to the basics” way of looking at teaching: do an audience analysis to learn what the students know. Hannum states that prior knowledge is the vital factor for instructional success and leads the teacher to where to start the instruction and how to design the curriculum. As we’ve discussed when talking about constructivism, learning is most relevant when we help the students create meaning by linking new knowledge to old knowledge.

If we underestimate our students’ knowledge, they will be board; overestimate, and they will be frustrated. Hannum points out what anyone who has been a student knows: either error in planning will result in a waste of the student’s time.

Hannum’s recommended audience analysis includes general characteristics (broad, demographic characteristics, education level, job classification, prior experience, age, rank or level in organization, backgrounds, interests, and potential uses of instructional content) and specific entry behaviors (small, specific capabilities, based on instructional analysis, the student’s ability in an area, collect by pretesting and diagnostic tests). Hannum reminded us that we typically have access to general characteristics in advance, and specific entry behaviors can be learned through pretesting. The main tool that I’ve taken from this presentation is that pretesting is vital. I’ve known that I’d like to do that, as it’s in my personality to want to avoid boredom and frustration (so I’ve worked a bit of this out on my own), but I hadn’t seen an argument—using research—laid out in such an effective way. So, it’s in the plans for me.

(However, I am still interested in seeing the research, not only for the points mentioned about the audio/visual learners before, but the 10-20% folks who are significantly affected by learning styles.)

edubiology

2005-04-08T16:42:00.000-04:00

Today I read "Does Technology Present a New Way of Learning?" by Robert N. Leamnson (as found in Educational Technology & Society 4(1) 2001).

When I first looked at it, I was a little bit apprehensive. My experience with sociobiology has been negative, and this seemed like it could potentially border that off base theory. However, at least in the span of this short article, it didn't.

Leamnson states that learning is a biological process. He says that this process has always been the same in humans and explains how the brain changes with age and learning. Leamnson says that learning, itself, doesn't change, though the disciplines might. For this reason he argues that technology for technology's sake isn't the best way to teach a class.

Leamnson seems to follow the trend our course has taken: technology is good as an aid for the student to learn more, but it's not the end-all for learning. He recommends guarding against misuse of technology in the classroom, and merely using it to facilitate the biological learning process we all use.

And you have to love anything that quotes Neil Postman. This article did: (1992)... '[t]echnological change is not
additive; it is ecological. A new technology does not merely add something; it changes everything.'"

surprises inthe LCI!

2005-04-08T12:44:00.000-04:00

My Learning Connections Inventory results weren't exactly what I expected. I figured that I'd score highly for Confluent Processing, and low on the other three. However, I my "use this pattern first" was a tie between Confluent and Precise Processing and the other two, Sequential and Technical Processing tied for "avoid this pattern."

How strange that no process landed in the "I use this pattern as needed."

In retrospect I can see how I might score under the "Precise" category. I had associated it (based on the paragraph definition we read earlier) with "Sensing" in the Meyers-Briggs: I though Precise was a style that would be very detail and fact oriented. Now I realize that perhaps it deals more with information rather than detail. (I make this distinction because I may not be good with numbers, but I want to make sure I know the concept behind the way we use numbers.)

It's interesting to me that the Precise pattern seems to be in direct conflict with Confluent processing. I knew I'd score well for the Confluent processing Pattern, which is for those who synthesize, pull together ideas, and don't mind guessing according to their intuition. How could someone worried with accuracy of knowledge (a Precise processor) also like guessing? I think in my case it has to do with the fact that once I feel that I have the most accurate information that I can have (and have done the research to back it) then I feel that my guesses will probably be on target... and then I don't have to do that pesky double-checking that I can't stand (because I'm not at all Sequential).

It's no surprise to me that I ended up in the avoidance category with both confluent Sequential and Technical processing. What can I say? I only grudgingly double check information (which I always put off as long as possible) and I really prefer not to repeat. I'm also not a mechanically-minded person, so tools (as a thing) aren't that interesting or useful for me in my learning process. I was, however, surprised I scored so lowly on the Technical area, as I enjoy technology based tools and always try to intuit (hey-Confluent!) how to use things so that I can avoid the manual.

learning syles (adapted BB post)

2005-04-08T12:15:00.000-04:00

Learning Styles don’t matter

Or so we read at the website.

The website (to me, at least) seemed primarily to be a complaint about all the different labels that are given to students (primarily through personality testing). I'd actually agree with the site if that were the point, as I think labels tend to pigeonholed people more than help them. But that wasn't the argument. The argument really seemed to be that there are too many labels; that is not something I can agree with. Though I don't like the idea of giving labels to people, having multiple types of labels to pull from (at least) gives a broader perspective of the person that a one-dimensional one.

The article says that it's too much work for a teacher to run a classroom with attention to each learning style. I actually agree that that shouldn't be the expectation: there are too many tests which lead to even more types for that. I think the problem is that the author lacks a nuanced understanding of multiplicity and the value of greyness. The author see it as black and white, a teacher either can or can't, learning types are good or bad. I think the author ought to consider how all these parts add up to the whole. There's different measurements for different learning types, there are age, ethnic, gender, and class differences, there's varying educational backgrounds. There are so many factors that there is no one way to measure a learner, so the teacher must attempt to know their students as people.

An understanding of various characteristics of the people in a classroom can allow a teacher to know how a particular class would react to a specific lesson. A teacher who knows her/his students will be able to read nonverbal signals to know if the lesson is going well.

As for the author's criticism of learning style tests: I personally don't love them (mostly because I believe they're misused more than they ought to be). However, if used appropriately they can be useful. If used in the context of knowing a person and as a general guide for statistics on the classroom, then the tests may be a useful guide. They're certainly not the end-all for lesson planning, though.

MOO reflections

2005-04-05T22:25:00.000-04:00

I promised a reflection of my presentation in the MOO room, so here it is:

MOO is such a strange medium! The presentation pretty much emphasized the feelings I’ve been having with MOO throughout the semester. They’re much stronger now. Here’s a quick run-down of my thoughts:

It’s (obviously) text based
Pro: Text allows specific facts to be stated in a way that everyone can have access to them. In a traditional classroom, a participant may drift off into a daydream for a minute and snap back, but by the time the participant is paying attention the missed information may not be repeated.
Con: I really rely on nonverbal cues when I present to a group. I ask for head-nods; I look for eye contact; I use this information to determine if it’s alright to move on or if I need to stay on topic. There is none of this in a chat room, so the presenter has to hope that the audience is providing accurate information through comments.

Everyone talks
Pro: This is great for folks who are shy in traditional classrooms (like me). It’s more democratic, because there’s no stopping the comments as there would be in a traditional classroom.
Con: Whoa, everyone talks. A slide that might only take thirty seconds to go over in a traditional classroom might last for five minutes in a chat room environment. (This can be really nice, though, as tangential information might come up that would have otherwise seemed irrelevant… which is another Pro.)

There is “less time”
Pro: Since everyone is talking, there is “less time” in the class for the lesson plan. This allows the audience involved in the discussion a lot more freedom in the direction of their lesson. It allows conversation that the audience is actually interested in, rather than just what the instructor wants to teach.
Con: Sometimes (like in state-mandated curriculums or assigned presentations) there is specific information to cover, and this format doesn’t allow the presenter to have control over time the way a traditional format does. The instructor really must pay attention to the clock at all times to get all the information in.

Transcripts!!!
Pro: It’s great to have a transcript to study by or to use if a participant was absent. I imagine it would also be useful for the instructor to keep track of how students are doing.
Con: People might be hesitant to write in if they know they are being recorded. Permanent documentation is threatening if a person isn’t entirely sure if they want to make the comment or not.

So, that’s my overall feeling. I’m glad to have presented in this format, and I’d do it again in an appropriate context. I’m glad that my classmates are good co-MOO-participants, too… it makes it easy for the person presenting!

rambling & service-learning (adapted BB post)

2005-04-05T22:09:00.000-04:00

I'm not sure if this will go anywhere, but bear with me...

I've just started the book Orality and Literacy (which you recommended to me earlier this semester, Bob). It's really interesting so far, though since it was published in 1982 the discussion of electronic communication is limited to television, radio, and the like.

A parallel to something Bob mentioned in the last post is the idea that cultures that use writing study. Because we can re-read text and learn from them, education becomes abstract. Oral cultures have apprenticeships (and I'd guess mentorships) in which studying--as we know it--doesn't exist. Learners work with teachers to pick up skills in order to be able to do skilled work.

So, the mention of tying education to something that matters to people, such as meaningful work, makes me think about internships and service-learning opportunities. Taking abstract lessons and tying them to something real.

Has anyone here participated in doing/teaching a service-learning class? It's really unbelievable.

The model NCSU used was to have a class with reading/discussion/lecture/and writing. The students broke into groups and came up with meaningful service projects that they could do that would reinforce the course material. Throughout the semester the groups would work on the service project, keep journals, and meet in regular reflection groups (guided by SL experienced students) and discuss what they had learned in the "real world" experience and how it tied to class. Everything we learned in the class was tangible, and I ended up putting much more work into that class than I put in others... all because the material seemed so important and real...

So, I guess in this semi-long ramble, I'd say that finding that desire and tying into it does, in my experience, make the learning more exciting to the learner... it's a matter of doing the legwork to find the desire or provide opportunities for the student to find that desire.

The Tipping Point

2005-04-04T22:03:00.000-04:00

So, I just read Malcom Gladwell's The Tipping Point. It was really good and I sortof feel the need to post quickly here about it. If you're unfamiliar with the book and its premise, Gladwell was curious about what made some ideas/products "tip" and others not. Gladwell equates "the tipping point" with the point when an idea or product goes mainstream and hits it big.

In terms of this class: Gladwell takes situations that seem chaotic and point to the most minute actions that have a larger effect on the broader situation. One example was that at the hight of crime in NYC, subway officials stopped graffiti on subway cars, and then crime dropped. (There's a lot more to that example, but for that you'll have to read the book. *grin*)

In terms of info. lit.: I wasn't there, but Gladwell spoke at Midwinter (ALA) about what it would take for libraries to tip. I spent the last half of the book thinking about what it would take for information literacy to tip. I certainly don't have any answers, but now I think that it has to (1) come from individual institutions and (2) also have a broad movement in which "connectors" or "mavens" share information between individual institutions. There, of course, would need to be "mavens", "salespeople," and "connectors" at the school level, too, to spread the word among faculty and advisors. So now I'm thinking about how to make info. lit. "sticky" and what are the small changes that can be made to make it tip.

learning in permanent white water

2005-04-03T21:11:00.000-04:00

I’ve been reading a parallel book on and off during this course. It’s Peter B. Vaill’s Learning as a Way of Being: Strategies for Survival in a World of Permanent White Water. Vaill is faculty in a business school and is interested in the education of business people. He felt that “permanent white water,” the changing information environment in which we exist, is increasingly complex and people need to learn to operate within such a culture.

Sound like chaos anyone?

So, here’s a run-down of interesting points that I felt were pretty relevant for our course:

p. 38 Education, as it is today, is primarily something that is independently done. Students in classrooms are responsible for their own work and have to learn the materials individually. He suggests that co-learners, or a learning community, would be useful.

p. 44 – p. 47 Vaill suggests different kinds of learning that are relevant for a permanent white water environment. These include, “Self-Directed Learning,” “Creative Learning,” “Expressive Learning,” “Feeling Learning,” “On-line Learning,” “Continual Learning,” and “Reflexive Learning.” I’m sure you can see the parallels to some of our course discussions.

p. 60 Vaill recommends teaching from the point where students are curious and have energy, not necessarily from the logical place to start.

p. 104 There is a fairly extensive discussion of Peter Senge’s systems thinking, referencing The Fifth Discipline.

p. 163 Vaill discussion the role context plays in meaning and how that affects learning.

p. 191 Quoting Chittister, Vaill says that learning focuses too much on education and graduation and not enough on the actual process of learning. (Though he doesn’t quite put it this way, Vaill thinks learning should be reframed to be seen as a process of life.)

Hannum and Hansen redux

2005-04-02T23:44:00.000-05:00

We just reread an article from earlier in the semester: “Methods and Media” by Hannum and Hansen. I think it’s really useful to go back and reread/re-experience things from new perspectives, so it’s was good to do that in light of this course.

The main gist of the chapter is that the selection of methods and media must be determined before development of the course materials. The decision should be made on a macro level (the entire curriculum), and then specialized to the design of specific courses/classes. According to the research Hannum and Hansen found, there is no one best method/media, but some work in some designs better than others. Typically there will be options for the designer. In those cases the designer may choose according to very specific factors (objectives, conditions, time/money, familiarity, size of audience, frequency, format, accessibility/durability/convenience, and ease/speed of production).

Hannum and Hansen also gave an annotated list of specific methods (lecture, discussion, tutorial, independent study, demonstration, simulation, and role play, on-the-job training) as well as an annotated list of specific media (print, visual aids, transient media, and computerized media). Following each of these listed items was a list of pros and cons of each.

The article also had a discussion of research on methods and media effectiveness. The research discussed suggested that methods and media should be related to instructional strategy, that learners do not appear to learn best with a “matched” medium, that visualization can increase retention, that attention should be paid to cultural differences (as they affect understanding of visuals), and that computer use can actually reduce learning times.

Source:
Hannum, W. and Hansen, C. (1989). Instructional Systems Development in Large Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Chapter 10: Methods and Media

Metacognition and Information Literacy

2005-04-02T14:23:00.000-05:00

I remember thinking briefly about this the first time “metacognitive skills” came up in this course, but I hadn’t revisited it until Bob mentioned it in his presentation. It seems to me that if “metacognitive” skills are those that help students take control of their own learning, information literacy is a chief metacognitive skill. Information literacy skills are exactly the skills people need to be able to take control of their own learning and find the best information for their needs.

Bradford suggests that these metacognitive skills be incorporated into curriculum across all subject areas. This happens sometimes, when a teacher is an advocate of information literacy skills or the teacher is aware that there is a librarian (media specialist, etc) available to speak on the topic. Perhaps there should be a bigger push on the librarians’ end to market themselves and their specialty so that more teachers will use them in their classroom. Perhaps librarians should teach staff development sessions to teachers so that they might be able to incorporate some of the principles on their own. (I say this knowing that it happens in some places… I think that it should be on a larger scale, as a movement for librarianship as a whole instead of only in certain institutions.)

existing motivation (adapted BB post)

2005-04-02T14:15:00.000-05:00

I was struck by the reframing of teaching to the students that came up in Bob’s presentation. It seems that the focus is always on teaching to different learning styles, which is certainly helpful to students and a useful way to think about education for the teacher. However, with all the focus on learning styles, I had forgotten something pretty basic: if it’s something that I’m interested in or something that I have a stake in, I’ll pay attention and learn no matter what. I would venture to say this is true for most people. I have a friend who doesn’t like school or to read. Even though she doesn’t learn well in those settings, she learns all she can about clothes and fashion. She’s putting in an immense amount of work (even reading!) to stay on the cutting edge of that body of knowledge. Because it’s something interesting to her, she’s motivated to learn no matter the way the information is conveyed. Perhaps the real challenge for educators should be to focus their energy on learning what is already a motivator for the student and teach to that.

Dr. King's presentation

2005-04-02T13:52:00.001-05:00

Today I watched/listened to Bob's presentation on Instructional Design titled "Instructional Stragegies."

This presentation summarized Dr. Hannum’s presentation from the other day and then evaluated Salcedo in light of Bransford and Zull.

Bob summarized the previous presentation suggesting that Jose Joachim Salcedo was a brilliant instructional strategist because he overcame design constraints with good strategies, was analytic and creative, used strategies that were multiple yet coordinated, used techniques that worked on multi-levels, used strategies that fit the context and were tied to specific needs, and used social interaction. From this, Bob recommended that we (as instructional designers), try to understand what others think and to combine strategies and methods with context and needs.

From here, we considered the theories of Bransford and Zull with attention to Salcedo.

The first finding:
Bransford suggests that students come to the classroom with preconceptions about how the world works. For instruction to work, we have to build on those preconceptions. Zull made the same point when he stated that neuronal networks grow by building on existing networks. Salcedo’s design worked in this way, starting with the level of knowledge that the community had, and building on this. Salcedo had to assess the knowledge that his community had to understand how to add to that.

The second finding:
Bransford thinks that teachers must teach some subject matter in depth and provide many examples in which the same concept is at work. This provides a firm foundation of factual knowledge. Zull has a similar point when he suggests that if we want students to be able to process the information we teach them, then we need to limit the number of items that they need to process. Salcedo did this as well. He focused on target areas that the community needed to learn about and continued to build upon those through theme programming.

The third finding:
Bransford says that we should integrate “metacognitive” skills (those that help students take control of their own learning) into curriculum in multiple subject areas. Zull says that we learn things that are important to us (which is related to emotion). Salcedo was teaching things that were important to the community (farming, health, etc), and also doing things that allowed people to learn on their own (such as with the corresponding newspaper, so that audience members could learn to read).

Bob pointed out that some might say Salcedo had it easy because his audience was homogenous. However, Salcedo would be likely to take the same approach if he had a mix of urban and rural population. Bob suggests that Salcedo may have mixed in urban metaphors as well and that there would be some transfer to the other context for the audience.

Bob concluded with an if/then statement (going back to his degree in philosophy) saying that “if learners learn best when they are connecting new ideas with existing ideas, when they are given just a few ideas to work with at a time, and when they are active and in charge of their own learning then we need to try to pick instructional strategies that are responsive to the above.”

presentation in MOO!

2005-03-30T21:10:00.001-05:00

I presented this evening in MOO... what a crazy experience! Normally I try to prepare twice the needed materials for an in-person presentation. In MOO, I think it'd be useful to prepare half!

I'll reflect more on this later.

For now:
MOO PowerPoint Presentation (with notes)
Supervising Younger Workers (this contains links to research/information as well as my presentation and examples)

Update: Bob sent me the transcript of the presentation. It can be found here.

personal IL learning goals

2005-03-29T21:39:00.000-05:00

There are three major areas I'd like to focus on learning about as a personal interest to information literacy. These are:

1. The historical development of IL leading up to current IL trends
2. The transformation of (university) libraries in light of IL
3. The role of information literacy in cultural developments (with attention to international college-level issues)
4. The introduction of journaling to information literacy programs

continued course involvement

2005-03-29T21:35:00.000-05:00

I've been breathing for the last two weeks. I've still be participating in the course, but I've taken it down a notch after doing my presentation. Now I'm itching to get back into the game.

I know we're going to continue with readings and lectures and incorporating new ideas and principles into our projects, but I'd like to do some more independent work too. So, I'm seeing my other original goal resurface. I'd like to spend some time thinking about information literacy in light of instructional design. I've been hording interesting (looking) articles and publications all semester, so it's time to dive in. I'll be adding thoughts about those to this blog.

I also checked out two books, early on, that Bob recommended. Now I feel that I might have time to look into them. I'll be reading those throughout the rest of the semester, too.

hidden agendas (adapted BB post)

2005-03-27T22:06:00.000-05:00

Scott discussed hidden agendas in his Elluminate presentation. Sue and I thought it was an interesting idea. The “hidden agenda” is a really interesting concept! I was thinking about my project and realized that it's hidden even (somewhat) from me. At first I thought that my “hidden agenda” was to help supervisors see the student workers/volunteers as people, but then I realized that that was made very clear in the beginning; I didn't say it exactly that way, but I alluded to it & included a quote about it in the handout. So, it's not hidden. Then I thought that perhaps my “hidden agenda” was for supervisors to realize that in treating student workers well, we're creating ambassadors and advocates for libraries; however, once again, I did mention this. I finally considered technology (like Scott) because I used the technology that many of the "millennial" generation uses to show the supervisors how they could incorporate it into training & supervision. That's when I realized that my "hidden agenda" was to help older supervisors realize the perspective of the younger workers and that if they could realize the culture of younger workers, they could perhaps supervise more effectively. All the specific tasks that I trained folks to do, the needs I addressed, aimed at helping supervisors realize what it's like to be a younger worker and what their special needs are.

hobbies and design (adapted BB post)

2005-03-27T22:03:00.000-05:00

Scott brought up the useful juxtaposition of hobbies with design. Salcedo combined radio with education, Bob combines art and technology with education, and Scott combines technology and music with his job.

I agree that joining hobbies and art with work is useful. It makes work more enjoyable (and allows us to be more passionate re: work) when we marry our hobbies and interests to it. For me, it’s not so much my hobbies (reading & writing seem pretty fundamental to traditional learning anyway, and knitting/pottery/general crafts would be a bit more of a reach) but my academic interests in other areas, as well as my previous work experiences, that highlight and influence my designing in all areas of life.

And it only makes sense that we would do that. As we were discussing several weeks ago in this course, our lives are extremely interrelated. Work may inform what we’re learning. So may our other hobbies and interests. This interrelatedness makes everything more interesting, meaningful, and potentially useful. I say it’s a good thing we go with it and use our hobbies and other interests in any design.

Dr. Hannum's presentation

2005-03-27T21:43:00.000-05:00

Today I watched/listened to Dr. Wally Hannum's presentation on Instructional Design titled "Education in Rural Colombia."

Dr. Hannum used Jose Joachim Salcedo as an example of an instructional designer. Salcedo was a smart and radical priest who was sent to the Andes Mountains to the northeast of Bogota in South America. His parish was a rural one, which was considered to be difficult. Salcedo wondered, "is religion enough?" He looked at his community and essentially conducted a needs analysis. He realized that education is the key and focused on the critical needs of the people. He realized that specific knowledge could reduce problems, mass media could reach people, he could help people participate, and use education to move folks to action.

Salcedo used a lot of time traveling to others; the landscape took a lot of time to navigate, which didn't leave much for teaching. For this reason he started a radio school in 1947: Radio Sutatenza. The station carried useful news and information for the rural community, including: information on crops, farming, health, and basis schooling. The messages were entertaining and coordinated across all programming.

Dr. Hannum pointed out that we now know Salcedo's method as constructivist: knowledge should not be isolated; it should build on other knowledge. Salcedo started focusing on the audience, the needs of the users, and he used this information to create useful texts for the specific audience.

There was a parallel newspaper, written to correspond to the radio shows. Audience participation was high. Folks shared the papers and wrote letters to the paper. These letters were part of an ongoing needs assessment. There was also a training institute that worked with the radio and the newspapers.

Salcedo's media always maintained a rural focus, and he always sent messages through a variety of sources.

The solution, as realized by Salcedo: appropriate education, a focus on the learners, based on real needs, uses content that matters, delivers the education in the best possible manner, emphasizes success, requires constant evaluation and revision, and requires a systematic approach.

Salcedo followed a model very similar to our course model. He analyzed (needs assessment, task analysis), designed, developed, implemented, and evaluated his educational plan.

The following few entries are adaptations of my discussion on Blackboard about Hannum's presentation.

there's a lot of writing in this course!

2005-03-22T22:16:00.000-05:00

So, I was a little curious about the amount of writing I'd done for this class. I cut and pasted each month's entries into a word document and found that I had writen 46 pages for this course! Yes, some of that is a bit repetitive, and none of it is as in-depth as a 15 page research paper, but that's still a lot of writing! Last semester I wrote about about half that amount total, and this semester is only halfway over...

presentation of the project

2005-03-22T22:01:00.000-05:00

On Friday, March 18th, I was fortunate to participate in the 2005 Library Support Staff Enrichment Workshop for Eastern North Carolina, Professionalism and Respect: A Winning Combination. This was the second year that East Carolina University hosted the workshop, and the growth rate has made it clear that this is a needed venue for library support staff. Last year there were 95 participants, this year there were 215. The audience spanned from folks who were just considering working in libraries to folks who had spent an entire career in a support staff position. The folks who had several years under their belt were excited to have an opportunity to share their knowledge as well as learn more. That was a big factor I hadn’t considered in thinking about my audience. Most of the participants had never had an opportunity to share expertise, as paraprofessionals are sometimes treated as though they had nothing to share since their role is towards the bottom of the library hierarchy. This was an outlet for folks who are experts and have valuable knowledge to share, so I probably would have been equally successful if I had just moderated a discussion for an hour.

But, I had planned to present, so I squished my presentation down a bit more and ended up having plenty of time for discussion.

My presentation was “Supervising Younger Workers.” I spoke about interviewing techniques, rewarding behaviors, and communication practices with younger workers drawing on communication studies, student development theory, and servant leadership. In the past, I’ve focused on theory and overarching ideas that can be applied to many situations. Due in large part to the task analysis, this presentation was much more practical. I touched on theory, but delved into example.

Many people came to the program with specific issues that had arisen with their student workers or volunteers. So, during the discussion portion of the presentation I reiterated some examples and facilitated group discussion of other’s techniques.

Just over 30 people attended, about half of which expressed interest in a listserv for fellow supervisors and continued dialog. I’ve set it up, but so far only four people are on it. I’ve posted one message, but there hasn’t been response yet. I’ll be interested to see if this is a tool people actually use. The website for my presentation can be found here. I’ve already received an email from someone who was happy I had the website up and the person said they were particularly glad to use the student information sheet I’ve posted.

I passed out evaluations (the workshop didn’t do them for individual sessions). Of the approximately 33 people who attended, 17 returned them. All those that were returned were positive… so I’m not sure if the remaining 16 weren’t positive (as in “if you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say it at all”), didn’t care one way or the other, don’t fill out evaluations, or some combination of the above. Of those that were returned, people really liked the interaction and discussion section. They also indicated that they were thankful for specific examples and things that they could actually use (such as the student information sheet).

So, overall I think it went well. There are always things that I’d like to have done differently, and this is no exception, but I think that everyone at least took away one useful thing.

presentation resources websites

2005-03-12T12:43:00.000-05:00

I'm in the process of pulling together a website with the resources from my presentation. I'd like to include the PowerPoint slides & notes (I'm not a big fan of relying on PowerPoint, but I really like the notes feature... it's good for having extra information in case the presentation is moving too fast), the examples I'll show in the presentation, and useful print & web resources. I'll probably be working on it until the presentation, and then updating with relevant information that came up in the presentation after the fact. The website is here.

Instructional Design Project and Presentation Scorecard

2005-03-12T12:30:00.000-05:00

This blog entry lists presentation elements and discussion regarding the development and self-assessment of my project.

Designer's Philosophy / Personal Infrastructure

My design philosophy

I am big-picture kind of person, so I like to start design processes this way. I like to spend a fair amount of time researching, thinking, chatting with others, and reading. I also like to talk with my closest friends and family about fantastic, out-of-this-world plans (even if I know that there’s no way I’ll actually do them). From there I narrow the scope of the design to a manageable level. I pick guidelines and a few specific goals. From there I focus on specifics and make as many contingency plans as I can. I know I’m done when I feel that I’ll be comfortable no matter the outcome. This requires some flexibility to be built into the design. In doing this I'm not trying to plan for everything, but just enough that there is the ability to do on-the-spot changes as necessary. If I know that surprise situations won't be a problem then I feel like I can be relaxed enough to actualize the design. Of course, things might happen that the plan can’t accommodate, but as long as I feel reasonable sure that I can deal with whatever comes up then I feel like the plan is as finished as it can be.

My philosophy is two fold: be prepared as possible (a lot of research, prepare for multiple possible outcomes) and flexibility (the ability to roll with any of the researched possibilities). I also like to do a lot of communicating with the ones most affected by my design to make sure that the plan is adaptable enough to compromise with the other party.

Working with others (& their philosophy)

Working with others means communication, communication, communication. I like to make sure that I know what the other party would like (generally, specifically, short term, long term outcomes, etc.). I also like to communicate what I’m thinking so that if I’m going down the wrong path the other party can let me know that we’re not on the same page. Effectively communicating with the other party often means adapting to their terms. For example, if I were to do something in-house I’d probably stop by someone’s office or call them on the phone, which is the main culture of communication here. For my presentation about supervision I’ve primarily used email. Email was the stated preferred method of communication with the program coordinator.

If a situation were to arise in which it becomes clear that the organization and I are philosophically diametrically opposed, my hope would be that compromise and mediation communication techniques may help us find common ground.

Overall, though, flexibility is key. The ability to adapt to the needs of the organization and students is critical for instructional design, so I guess this applies to my philosophy of design, too.

My processing type (from Learning Connections Inventory)

My suspicion is that of the four types listed I lean most heavily towards confluent. I really do like to pull from all areas of experience to form new idea or thought. I’m sure this is pretty clear from my discussions of communication, philosophy, women’s studies, resident life, service-learning, student supervision, etc. I see the world of information (as well as the world, period) as being entirely interconnected. I believe this so whole-heartedly that I think that there is a fundamental error in western belief in binary dualism and the separation of everything into distinct terms. So, I’ve always enjoyed seeing how theories fit together. Also, for someone who is extremely rational and logical in how I think, I also take big guess and follow intuition when it comes to new ideas. Sometimes this backfires (a paper on Greek philosophy leading towards oppressive thinking for a philosophy class); sometimes it works well (a paper criticizing contemporary cataloging practices from a postmodern view).

Correcting for bias in LCI

So, I’m probably confluent, and that would come out in presenting. However, I’d also make sure to incorporate sequential discussion and time to think, precision facts and opportunities for rewards, and technical information such as specific tools to use and clues as to how to use them.

In the case of my supervision presentation, confluent thinking will be evident in the many information sources I’m using as well as from participants in discussion. Though I like to draw information from many places, and not necessarily sequentially, I’m going to keep the general program on target for the sequential folks. I’ll give an outline at the beginning and a wrap up at the end so that they’ll know what where we’re going and where we’ve been. Facts will be given, with sources sited for those who are precision learners. I’d like to incorporate an opportunity for precision folks to be “right” in such a way that they can point to their accomplishment. However, I also don’t like making people feel “wrong,” so I have to think more on how to accomplish the reward for precision folks. Finally, for the technical folks I’ll bring real examples. I’ll log into my Blackboard setup to show how to use course management software as a tool for supervision. I’ll pass out my staff training manual so that people will see how they can use a modular version for their staff.

Using an infrastructural skill set to effectively address diversity

Once again, in my view communication, conversation, mediation, and flexibility win out. I can certainly be sensitive to diversity issues (in fact, I’ve put a lot of work into learning about them), but I’ll never be able to speak for someone in another position. For this reason I like to create a friendly atmosphere to encourage conversation. People can speak freely from their position. This does require mediation skills, as sometimes this backfires! This also requires flexibility because presentations might not go the way they’re expected to go!

On another note, I find systems thinking is relevant to this, too. Thinking systemically allows the facilitator to make bridges between comments that may seem off target or incorrect in the current context. By thinking systemically a facilitator can bring the point back home, and with good communication skills the facilitator can keep the commenter in the game (when otherwise an off comment and bad classroom reaction may make the commenter stop discussing).

Project Definition

Using the needs assessment tool to 'excavate' the project context

Needs assessment is (as has been said in this blog) determining a need. This may be done by interviewing people to determine what gaps exist. In the instance of my project, the need is for paraprofessional library staff to gain more skills for effective supervision of younger workers. I have spoken with several paraprofessional who have expressed this need. These jobs often fall to paraprofessional who often have no training in supervision.

I particularly paid attention to the following points made by Kaufman "needs are identified as gaps between current and desired results, there is a clear distinction between ends and means, the statement of need is free from any indication of how need will be met, the statement of need is free from indication of what resources will be used, needs are listed in order of priority and the priority is the basis of cost to meet need versus what it will cost to ignore it."

I don't expect large societal (Mega) results, though I do expect that there will be some reflections of the presentation in the communities of the libraries in which participants work.

I think there will be much more significant results at the organizational, or Macro, level. This is the environment in which participants will be able to use their new knowledge and perspectives, and hopefully there will be an impact for the student workers.

Finally, there ought to be individual, or micro, level results, too. Individuals should feel better about their role as a supervisor and how they do their job. Their workers should realize a difference, as well.

Through interview data on the ideal and actual state, I’ve further defined the needs for this presentation. Improved supervision is a large goal… there are many aspects of supervision including interviewing, hiring, work-study laws, training, communicating, creating teams, evaluating, coaching, rehiring, and firing. There is no way to address the entire supervisory role within a one-hour period. After further discussion with supervisors and those they supervise, I found that there are three critical needs: administrative foundation building (such as interviewing and scheduling), rewarding, and communication. These are the three needs that will be addressed in my presentation.

I’ve also spent time reading the current literature in the field. I’ve paid attention to what problems have shown up in articles and how other practitioners in the field respond to these issues.

List of needs, categorized according to knowledge/skill, motivational, and environmental

Administrative
interviewing: knowledge/skill
scheduling: knowledge/skill , motivational, environmental

Reward
atmosphere: knowledge/skill, environmental, motivational
through work: motivational, knowledge/skill

Communicative
creating open channels: environmental, knowledge/skill
specific useful tools: knowledge/skill
evaluative: knowledge/skill, motivational

At this point, I hope it is clear that the project is focused on knowledge/skill needs, though some fall into other categories as well. Even in the “reward, atmosphere” area, knowledge and skills are important for creating that atmosphere.

Concept mapping

Though I’m apparently a pretty limited visual learner, I did use a concept map to further determine the design for this instruction. It can be found here.

Reframing

I will use reframing within my instruction for this presentation. My goal will be to reframe student workers as people to cooperate with the library team, rather than “student worker.” It’s easy for people to fall into the trap of thinking that the student worker can just file (or insert any mind-numbing task) for an entire shift and still do a good job. If a supervisor can look at the student as a person they will have a better chance at understanding what motivates a student and how to use the work experience in a positive way for the student.

Feasibility

The context of this instruction will support it. The participants will all be people who do or soon will supervise students, so their professional background matches the topic. The presentation will also be given within a larger workshop, so the participants will go to three other presentations that day. My presentation will fit within that context.

Instructional Articulation

Task analysis

Task analysis is a holistic view. This is what the instruction should help the students to do. A designer gathers task analysis data through observations, interviews, and readings in order to find out what the students should be able to do, breaking the job down into tasks and selecting the most critical ones via criteria like difficulty, importance, and frequency.

The holistic “job” for the learners in my presentation is “effective supervision for younger workers.” Some tasks that are part of effective supervision are administrative and communicative.

component tasks: administrative
interviewing
scheduling

component tasks: rewarding
atmosphere
reward through appropriate work

component tasks: communicative
creating open channels
maintaining communication tools (websites, listservs, handbooks, etc)
evaluation through communication

Instructional Goals

Goal 1: use administrative practices to create an effective staff
Objective 1.1: interviewing technique
Objective 1.2: mock interviewing
Objective 1.3: brainstorm scheduling techniques
Objective 1.4: discuss scheduling, what work/doesn't

Goal 2: to create a rewarding atmosphere for staff
Objective 2.1: share ideas about rewarding behaviors
Objective 2.2: list what has worked in participants’ experience
Objective 2.3: case study: rewarding through appropriate work

Goal 3: to communicate effectively with staff
Objective 3.1: to creating open channels with staff (in-person, phone, notes, email)
Objective 3.2: creating and maintaining mass communication tools (websites, listservs, handbooks, etc)
Objective 3.3: evaluation through communication (continuation of training, creates atmosphere of feedback, etc)

Instructional Methods and Media

Methods and media can be chosen after considering needs assessment, task analysis, goals, and objectives. Considering the objectives described above, I'd want to establish a communicative community in which there is a lot of sharing. (After all, everyone knows something about supervision, even if they haven't supervised before... everyone's had a supervisor of some sort!) I'd also want to use demonstration to show how I've incorporated my listserv, training materials, and blackboard into supervision. Though I don’t like to rely on computer mediated presentations, I’ll probably use PowerPoint slides to keep the conversation on target. I’ll have hard copies of the student handbook and pictures of the staff bulletin board. I definitely want to incorporate the use of course management software for communication, though I’ll need to adapt it so that those without the luxury of Blackboard or WebCT can use html to build a useful site, if they so please.

Instructional Evaluation

A goal based evaluation would be done well after the event, by contacting participants to see how they're doing on the goals. I don't know that I'll be able to contact the folks six months out, so I'll need to rely on an evaluation immediately after the fact. The participants won't be able to tell me what they've used, but they can tell me what they learned and what they anticipate using. I plan on making an evaluation form and passing it out. I’ll also give my contact information to everyone in case they’d like to comment to me later. Finally, I really want to create a communication list so that if folks wanted to discuss any issues once they got back to their home institution they could. For the people who are interested I’ll pass around a sheet and email the information out. I can also set up a listserv through my personal page if that is something the group thinks would be useful.

post script
So, I think I went through the check-list appropriately. My presentation is on March 18th, so I'm starting to have to really focus in. Let me know if you have any recommendations!

Yay ALA!

2005-03-08T17:47:00.000-05:00

I just found out that I've been appointed to ALA's Committee on the Status of Women in Librarianship. (As you probably can tell, this committee deals with issues I'm extremely interested in.) I haven't figured out the logistics of if I'm able to accept quite yet, but it's a very exciting opportunity!

Update: My very supportive employer has a policy in place which states that they will support conference attendance for committee members, so I can accept the offer!!! The first meeting of the term starts with the next midwinter conference, which will also be my first ALA conference. Yay!!!

i ::heart:: postmodernism

2005-03-08T17:37:00.000-05:00

Today I read Charles R. Dills and Alexander J. Romiszowski's 1997 How Is Insturucational Development a Social Practice? Instructional Development in a Postmodern World. (In Instructional Design Paradigms)

I enjoyed the whole article, so I'm just going to comment on a few points here.

Dills and Romiszowski started by saying postmodern instructional designers focus on the relationship between people and settings. This means they also consider the influence of sociopolitics, technosciences, and philosophy of education. I've been in school and exposed to media entirely in what can be considered the "postmodern era," so this way of thinking isn't all that surprising to me. It is to some of my peers, though. In college I was often surprised at the difference in world-view between some of my more technical peers and humanities peers. I can see how postmodern instructional design would be excellent for those who are apt to think in this fashion (in this case, the humanities peers), but for many people who don't naturally see the world in a postmodern way, (in my case, the technical peers,) it would be a stressful design.

I understand Dills and Romiszowski are arguing that the world is postmodern, where people must embrace "multiplicity, conflict, contradiction, uncertainty, ambiguity, and chaos." They argue that people need to be able to be comfortable & embrace ambiguity, uncertainty, and unanticipated meanings constructed in social settings. So, I can see that the duo may suggest that even if a postmodern design is stressful to a student, it's good to learn to adapt to it. I'm not sure where I fall in this way of thinking. Certainly postmodernism is big enough to contain the idea that there is a technical viewpoint in which thinkers of that sort may not best deal with postmodern constructs, but if postmodernism's tent becomes too big, it collapses with criticism of relativity and lack of rigor.

I really liked Dills and Romiszowski's discussion of the reflexive, cyclical nature of instructional design between ideology/theory and activity/practice. Indeed, postmodernism does allow for a new way to bridge active and theoretical.

Finally, I enjoyed Dills and Romiszowski's discussion of searching for meaning rather than mechanism. I agree, a postmodern viewpoint is more curious about meanings than mechanisms. For me, mechanisms (hows) are often a manifestation of meaning (why). The quote from Heshusius was right on target. I agree that society is no longer at a "am I right" position, but rather a moral "what kind of person am I or do I become" and "What kind of society are we constructing" position. It does seem to be in our best interest to move from describing ourselves to working in ethical & participatory ways.

instructional design & atomic theory

2005-03-07T17:40:00.000-05:00

The Instructional Design & Learning Theory piece, by Brenda Mergel further fleshed out part of our audio/visual presentation this week. I was interested to further read about the comparison of the development of instructional design to atomic theory development. Metaphors like that often help me understand a point even more clearly than if the point were just stated.

Mergel broke up the phases of instructional design development into three categories:

1) Behaviorism: Focuses on measured behaviors, ignores the individual's thought process.

2) Cognitivism: Focuses on associations established through contiguity and repetition.

3) Constructivism: Learners construct their own reality, new knowledge is added to the foundation of previous knowledge.

Similarly to the development of our understanding of matter, we started just looking at cause and effect (behaviorism/study of the atom), considered internal aspects as variables that affect the effect (cognitivism/something within atom causes behavior), and finally, we realized that each individual is in flux and not so cut and dried (constructivism/quantum).

Another point of Mergel's that I thought was interesting was her idea that the different levels of learning correspond to different levels of expertise in the learner. In the beginning, it's useful to use behaviorist principles, but as the learner understands more the instruction can become more cognitivist. Finally, as the learner becomes well versed in the subject matter, constructivism is a useful instructional design tool. I can understand the parallels, not just for the learner, but as a useful way for a teacher to understand the best way to teach a class. However, it probably wouldn't always be so cut and dried. Within one class there will be students who are further along in an area than others. Perhaps it would be most useful to target the student (as we've mentioned earlier) or to allow for multiple instructional styles within one course.

LCI and VARK

2005-03-05T14:15:00.000-05:00

We've been reading/talking about the Learning Connections Inventory in class lately. Then, we were told about a different learning styles test, VARK. The LCI test measures entirely different information than VARK. Both do address learning styles, but it the tests operate under different assumptions of what the main learning styles are.

I just took the VARK test (I scored: 0 visual, 6 aural, 9 read/write, and 5 kinesthetic). It's an interesting test that pretty much reinforced what I already knew or suspected—though I was surprised that I scored a “0” for visual. I could see how the VARK test could potentially shed light on a narrow aspect of learning. style My partner took it after I told him about it and he was a little surprised at his results.

I think that using VARK in combination with the LCI would be very useful. Both measure some *aspect* of learning, so having multiple perspectives on learning (combining reading/writing from VARK and-- I'm guessing-- confluent patterns from LCI) would allow a broader perspective on learning styles. In combination they’re likely more powerful than if they were used alone.

I don’t think that personality/learning-type test are every useful as an end-all stand alone test. Generally, I think they’re useful for a slice of oneself… an aspect of one’s personality or learning style.

the ID power train!

2005-03-02T20:54:00.000-05:00

The MOO session tonight was really useful! I normally like to see the whole picture, then figure out the steps involved... so when I first heard that we would be doing a step-by-step, parts to a whole, kind of lesson I wasn't too excited. However, after having been in the midst of the big picture for so long it was nice to see the highlighted pieces.

The Instructional Design process falls into five pieces that run (from start to finish) needs assessment, task analysis, goals and objectives, methods and media, and evaluation.

Needs assessment is (as has been said in this blog) determining a need. This may be done by interviewing people to determine what gaps exist. In the instance of my project, the need is for paraprofessional library staff to gain more skills for effective supervision of younger workers. (I have spoken with several paraprofessional who have expressed this need. These jobs often fall to paraprofessional who often have no training in supervision.)

Task analysis is a holistic view. This is what the instruction should help the students to do. A designer gathers task analysis data through observations, interviews, and readings in order to find out what the students should be able to do, breaking the job down into tasks and selecting the most critical ones via criteria like difficulty, importance, and frequency.

For example, my project's aim is for participants to become effective supervisors of young people. Some tasks that are part of effective supervision are administrative and communicative.

component tasks: administrative
interviewing
training procedures
training materials
scheduling

component tasks: communicative
creating open channels
maintaining communication tools (websites, listservs, handbooks, etc)
evaluation through communication

Goals and objectives follow from jobs and tasks. Within the scope of my project:

Goal 1: use administrative practices to create an effective staff
Objective 1.1: mock interviewing
Objective 1.2: share training procedures
Objective 1.3: training materials
Objective 1.4: discuss scheduling, what work/doesn't

Goal 2: to communicate effectively with staff
Objective 2.1: to creating open channels with staff (in-person, phone, notes, email)
Objective 2.2: creating and maintaining mass communication tools (websites, listservs, handbooks, etc)
Objective 2.3: evaluation through communication (continuation of training, creates atmosphere of feedback, etc)

Methods and media can be chosen after considering needs assessment, task analysis, goals, and objectives. Considering the objectives described above, I'd want to establish a communicative community in which there is a lot of sharing. (Afterall, everyone knows something about supervision, even if they haven't supervised before... everyone's had a supervisor of some sort!) I'd also want to use demonstration to show how I've incorporated my listserv, training materials, and blackboard into supervision.

Finally, evaluation! A goal based evaluation would be done well after the event, by contacting participants to see how they're doing on the goals. I don't know that I'll be able to contact the folks six months out, so I'll need to rely on an evaluation immediately after the fact. The participants won't be able to tell me what they've used, but they can tell me what they learned and what they anticipate using.

So, at this point, this is how I understand the "ID power train." It's 100 times clearer than it was before, but I'm still interested in feedback if you have any!

Update: The administration section on training actually isn't needed. When I went back to my needs assessment (from this perspective) I considered the tasks in light of the context. There will actually be an entire program on training at this workshop, so it's not needed within my presentation. However, with further discussion I've found another task that is useful for supervisors is a good understanding of delegation and rewards-- particularly the interplay between the two. So, this will replace the segment on training.

articulations from the last few weeks

2005-03-02T17:54:00.000-05:00

the purpose of a needs assessment

One of the first tools we used in this course was the needs assessment. The needs assessment's aim is not the way of doing the project, but the end result of the project. For example, to assess the needs for my project I considered the ultimate outcome that the participants will expect to gain (in light of the program information in the workshop materials).

While working on a needs analysis, it's important to order specific project needs so that they are in priority order. To do so the person using a needs analysis needs to consider what it costs to meet the need, and the costs of ignoring it. Finally, a needs analysis includes an understanding of Mega (large societal), Macro (organizational), and micro (individual) level results of the project.

The purpose of a needs assessment is for the designer to fully understand what actually must be included in the design. The needs assessment is designed to facilitate the consideration from the students' point of view, the potential long-range practical implications of the design, and what is actually feasible to accomplish.

the purpose of a task analysis

Another important tool that we used in this course is task analysis. The task analysis's aim is to consider the broad picture and use that information to break the instruction into parts.

what is the relationship between needs assessment and task analysis?

Needs assessment and task analysis form a good foundation in which to design upon. The needs analysis helps keep the students in center-focus, thinking about what they will need and how to prioritize that information. The task analysis helps break down the general needs into specific tasks that can be taught through the instructional design. Goals and objectives must wait until the designer fully understand what needs to be included and what tasks are needed. If goals or objectives were set before doing a needs assessment or task analysis, they may address irrelevant information or needs and tasks that are not priorities.

So, I'm not entirely sure that I have a great understanding of needs assessment and task analysis as we've discussed in class, but I feel that I'm understanding it better now than I did a week ago. We have a MOO session tonight, so surely that will help me understand the information a little more clearly.

For now I'm also excited about possibly taking the learning connections inventory!

adult training difficulties (adapted BB post)

2005-02-24T21:54:00.000-05:00

The instructional design goal that I have is also geared towards training adults in the work force. I can't remember for sure, Kelly, if your participants are from the same organization or not. I am targeting a group of individuals doing similar jobs at various institutions. I think that one of the biggest challenges for designing this program is that people will be coming from such diverse institutional and knowledge backgrounds. It'll be important (and a little intimidating) to get a quick idea of where everyone's coming from and to get everyone to a similar participation point.

gender (difference?) in education

2005-02-24T21:52:00.000-05:00

We’ve talked a lot about gender/sex differences in this course. So far, I’ve always felt the need to pitch in pretty early on this topic as a Women and Gender Studies minor who also considers the implication of gender in all other areas of study and life.

In the beginning coursework for this area of study students and scholars have to accept a pretty basic tenant: that though "male" and "female" (and the biological spectrum in-between) are genetic and observable factually (via physical characteristics or via genetics), "feminine" and "masculine" (and everything in-between) are socially constructed. The academic field of Women's Studies requires a belief in this basic tenant just as Economics requires students accept that people desire money (and that they will want to spend the least amount of money possible), music students have to accept Music Theory, and French Literature scholars must accept French grammar.

So, I'd say that "female" is biological while "feminine" is social.

I find the brain research discussing differences in the male and female brains is very interesting. I'm working on looking for some research to back up a hypothesis of mine, that perhaps a difference in the brain comes from socialization.

I think this in part because of Zull. He indicates that learning physically changes the brain. If we (meaning: society) treat little girls and boys differently from birth, would it really be that surprising if their brains developed differently and therefore boys and girls learn better in different settings and situations and women and men have observable differences?

It was pointed out in the forum that there are smaller cultures with more egalitarian gender roles; that larger, more warring societies (read: us) have a “need” for distinct gender roles, so highly specialized gender roles become standard. Smaller, more peaceful cultures have less of a need for specialized gender roles, but a larger need for everyone to work together within the community, so gender differences are nearly unobservable. Perhaps this is an example of how people’s brains adapt within their society and how hormones possibly don’t play as big of a role as it seems.

I also wonder about how we can "mass-educate” students and still provide individual educational experiences for each student without putting children into stereotypical boxes. I worry that it'd be just as bad to assume that all girls learn the same way as to assume that all boys and girls learn the same way.

How can we mass-educate and take time to consider each student as a person as per the reading Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together by William Issacs.

In the course of discussion our class has also discussed how girls now are performing better than boys in school and how the projected college graduation distribution will be significantly more female. Classmates wondered if we should now nurture boys to catch them up to girls. There are a number of reasons that I don't think we need to try to nurture boys (as a group) to get them to "catch-up" to girls (as a group). More specifically, I don't think we need to support boys more than girls.

I agree that boys need to be supported in the same way that girls need to be supported. I'm just not sure why it's necessary to use "boys and girls are different" as a premise for the argument. We should be focusing on the individual. The complexity of the factors that make up a person's likelihood to learn is so great that I don't think boiling it down to one issue or another will benefit anyone all that much.

I also see the problematic nature of encouraging one group at the expense of another (for example, the Laura Bush plan will only target boys, so though girls won't lose ground, boys will gain ground)... particularly when it's hard to say which group is better off. Research may show that girls perform better in the classroom, but research also shows that women do not do as well in the "real" world. Instead of focusing on bolstering boys, perhaps the issue should be equality and individuals... so that everyone can have an equal chance to succeed in the classroom and the "real" world.

information literacy in general education

2005-02-24T21:13:00.000-05:00

We’ve been talking a little bit about information literacy in the discussion forum on Blackboard. It seems that if education is designed to prepare folks to participate in society, and our society requires people to be critical thinkers and problem solvers existing within a flood of information, then regular education should include a fair amount of integrated information literacy. In my early education (and in some classrooms today) information literacy skills are entirely separate from the lesson. A librarian may be called in for a specific project, or the class may have library time once a week, leading students to believe that these skills exist separately. However, as we’ve been discussing, subjects don’t exist within a vacuum. Information literacy skills are important and necessary in all subject areas. So, now I'm thinking of information literacy in more general terms, as something that doesn't occur in the vacuum of a three-hour course, or a one-shot-visit with a class that's working on a research paper. Perhaps instead of singling out information literacy, we should attempt to incorporate its principles into regular education. Any class could have information literacy principles incorporated throughout the course. (There would still be room, and a need, for specialized research sessions and semester-long courses in Information Literacy, as well, but these sessions/courses could delve deeper into the subject.)

When we talk about individualized education in this course, we often talk about educating students to be able to learn on their own, which I see as a form of information literacy. As Sue points out, we see this in our coursework (needs assessment and task analysis as information gathering tools). This course is designed in such a way that each student will gain what (s)he needs… our own tool bag… as Bob points out.

As I've progressed further in my education, I can see the transition from fact learning to critical thinking (learning). So far my graduate classes are all (rightfully) critical thinking courses. I think that any critical thinking exercise would require information skills. A strong foundation in Information Literacy becomes more important as students progress through their education. As students progress, with more Information Literacy experience, their foundation should become even stronger.

Task Analysis

2005-02-22T21:37:00.000-05:00

Overview:

This week, I started a task analysis for my project. I used Hannun’s Task Analysis procedures as guidelines for this exercise. Hannun suggests three steps: task inventory, task selection, and task analysis. The following is my initial analyses of my presentation in light of Hannun’s Task Analysis.

I’ve decided to focus my project on the one-hour session (supervising younger workers). I had originally planned on using the presentation as a hands-on learning tool, as well as putting together a paper of some sort on instructional design and information literacy. I am still interested in the concept of instructional design and information literacy, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that the two goals are not compatible within the framework of the same project. So, for all course assignments I will use my presentation. However, I’m still thinking in the context of information literacy; expect to hear a lot more from me on this topic, as that is where my professional and academic interest lie!

Task Inventory

There are many tasks involved with designing this program. Tasks range from finding out about the resources available at the site, to facilitating discussion, to the presentation itself. I’ve selected the following goals using Hannun’s selection criteria.

Task Selection

(1) Surveys & interviews:

This task will take place prior to the presentation. I am in the process of soliciting information from supervisors and from supervisees. I am asking fellow supervisors what they want to know about their job, what they want to share about their job, and in what areas would they like more training. I am in the process of developing an anonymous survey for my student workers to find out what they expect from their supervisors, what they like about their supervision, and what they don’t like about their supervision. Anonymous surveys are necessary for the students, as I am their supervisor. A nice side-benefit is that I will be able to use the results to improve my own supervisory skills.

(2) Re-framing supervision:

I plan to use this part of the presentation to get people to think about their supervisory experience, get them to think about different ways of supervising, and to help people become comfortable talking in the group. Research and case-studies will be particularly important for this step.

(3) Understanding workers/volunteers as people:

This step will draw directly from participant’s experiences. I plan to shift talking to the audience and to help people draw the conclusions on their own. I plan to have case-studies as a back-up in case the audience is reluctant to be drawn into the discussion.

(4) Community members have information worth sharing

This is the point where I’m hoping for some chaos. With discussion and group work, I’d like to be more of a facilitator and less of a presenter. Group work will be planned in case it’s needed in this step.

(5) Evaluation and after the presentation:

There will likely be an evaluation available through the conference, but I plan to have a personal one as well. I’d also like to create a list of those who would like a network of fellow supervisors, and I will distribute it after the workshop.

Task Analysis

There are three types of task analysis, but most relevant to my project seemed to be Cognitive Task Analysis. This type of task analysis focuses on the mental processes needed to perform a job. It heavily relies on interviewing performers during or after a task. My presentation will include identifying supervisory roles, gathering data through discussion, and developing knowledge and guidelines for supervision. Participants will independently complete tasks once they return to their home institutions, but they will have the ability to get in touch with other participants after the presentation.

project definition

2005-02-15T23:03:00.000-05:00

Coming to understand "project definition" was slightly more challenging for me than understanding "infrastructure." This is likely because of events (being out of commission for a week) in my personal life, but I think it's also because project definition seems more complex to me.

Our course outlined four major parts of project definition: framing, digging, mapping, and modeling.

Watzlawick explains framing in a way that resonates with me. He suggests that we get used to seeing the world in a specific way, or a frame, and so we try to solve problems within the frame we're used to, and nothing really changes. (Think: cyclic) He suggests reframing issues in a "second order" frame, so that we can approach issues from a new perspective and create real change. (This reminded me of an article I read in a women's studies course: Audre Lord's "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House." The idea in this article is that within a patriarchal system, people working for true equality can't act in a patriarchal way, but must approach the problem from an entirely different perspective--a second order change!)

Framing the topic, as well as the presentation, has shaped how I understand my mission. However, with a shift in understanding (perhaps overtly saying "coaching," "facilitating," or "mentoring" rather than "supervision" would explain the topic more accurately. Perhaps the goal shouldn't be a presentation, but rather a program.

We also discussed Kaufman a lot in terms of digging. Kaufman provides an excellent framework for assessing needs for a project. The aim is not the way of doing the project, but the end results. As someone who enjoys the doing and process of a project, I needed to be reminded to focus on results. It's not about what would be nice to do, but what results would be nice to have (and how to get them).

I have explored the use of needs assessment and research in a previous post.

Kaufman also reared his head when it came to mapping. I am a "big picture" person. I am nearly a 100% "iNtuitive" on the Myers-Briggs indicator. Using Joseph Novak's explanation and cMap Tool's software, I designed a concept map, to have a better understanding of the project as a whole, what I'd like to convey in my project/program, and ways the community can use one another to learn. Having a big picture makes it easier for me to understand how to use small details to their best effect.

In terms of our last MOO session, I see myself as a person who makes a map first, to know where to dig. I use the map, find things as I dig, and adjust the map to fit. As with most aspects of this course (and life) it's cyclic.

Finally, modeling was the last area we considered in project definition. Between learning about chaos theory and system dynamics, modeling seems to me to be extremely theoretical (which is fun!). Perhaps most useful was the interview with David Bohm. I was really impressed with how much this lead me back to the "cloud piece." Over and over, the theme of interconnectedness arises. I can't help but think that in just accepting that, a person goes through a second-order change.

I think, in terms of my project, everything is interconnected. The participants will all be supervisors of some sort. All the supervisors will have some sort of reaction to the program (hopefully positive), as will their employees or volunteers (once again, hopefully positive!), as will I, as the facilitator. We can all share information with each other about our experiences, which means instead of a top-down, lecture method, the program will be more community-minded with more horizontal movement, and perhaps, it will be cyclical itself.

concept map for "supervising the younger worker"

2005-02-15T21:40:00.000-05:00

This is a concept map that I created to help define my project: a presentation dealing with supervising younger workers.

For full size c-map, click here.

(This map was generated using software from Cmap Tools.)

needs assessment (long)

2005-02-13T22:52:00.000-05:00

My ID project is to prepare a presentation for a workshop for paraprofessional library workers dealing with supervising younger workers. I'm lucky (but also a little overwhelmed) that the format and specifics of the presentation are up in the air.

To have a better idea of what exactly to do with the presentation, and in conjunction with this class, I am doing a needs assessment. However, according to Kaufman (mentioned earlier) the first step is to determine "when to use" a needs assessment.

My project meets several of the circumstances Kaufman describes. For example, (a) I want to ensure that the participants in my program will add value to the staffing of their home libraries and communities and (b) I want to demonstrate that the cost of attending the workshop (and therefore-hopefully-learning better supervision techniques) is less than not attending the workshop.

Using Kaufman's Needs Assessment Audit (also mentioned earlier) I identified and evaluated the specific project needs and ordered them so that they are in "priority order on the basis of what it costs to meet the need versus what it costs to ignore it."

I particularly paid attention to the following points "needs are identified as gaps between current and desired results, there is a clear distinction between ends and means, the statement of need is free from any indication of how need will be met, the statement of need is free from indication of what resources will be used, needs are listed in order of priority and the priority is the basis of cost to meet need versus what it will cost to ignore it."

I don't expect large societal (Mega) results, though I do expect that there will be some reflections of the presentation in the communities of the libraries in which participants work.

I think there will be much more significant results at the organizational, or Macro, level. This is the environment in which participants will be able to use their new knowledge and perspectives, and hopefully there will be an impact for the student workers.

Finally, there ought to be individual, or micro, level results, too. Individuals should feel better about their role as a supervisor and how they do their job. Their workers should realize a difference, as well.

The next step is to gather documents and interview data on ideal and actual state. I have started working on this with research. I have been reading supervision books and articles to make sure I have a better idea of the "big" picture, instead of only my position. I've talked with other supervisors about what they do, what they wish they knew how to do, and other secrets of the trade. I've talked with student workers about how they perceive their job, what they'd like to see change in their supervisors, and what they like about their supervisors. I plan to continue with this research with an anonymous survey of my student workers.

Needs Assessment (adapted BB post)

2005-02-12T22:35:00.000-05:00

To have a better understanding of needs assessment we read a little Roger Kaufman. One piece was an article in Intervention Resource Guide, "Needs Assessment" by Roger Kaufman. Another was a short piece, "A Needs Assessment Audit" from p&i, volume 33, number 2. At the time of the "Audit" piece, Roger Kaufman was a professor and the director of the Center for Needs Assessment and Planning at Florida State University.

He describes three levels of results: mega, which is societal-level; macro, which is an organizational-level; and micro, which is an individual or small group-level. Kaufman's "ideal vision identifies, in measurable terms, the kind of world we want for tomorrow's child" (from page 2 of the "A Needs Assessment Audit" article).

As Sue was saying on Blackboard, there is an interconnection between mapping tools and needs assessment. It seems to me that no matter where you start (whether a preliminary map or digging) once you get started it's all pretty cyclic. If you just start digging with an ultimate goal of having a map, then your big picture may not be complete because without having a map in the early phases you may miss your target entirely. If you start with a map and just keep on digging, your map will never be entirely complete and updated. The importance in "digging" as in instructional design (as in anything) is to be reflexive as you go and incorporate the details into a flexible and changing big picture.

Schooling's Upper Limit (adapted BB post)

2005-02-12T22:20:00.000-05:00

Today I looked at "Teaching-Centered Schooling Has Reached the Upper Limit" by Robert K. Branson (distributed by the Center for Performance Technology ). The major argument of the paper is that "... no major improvements will occur until a fundamental redesign, based totally on programmatic research and development, is undertaken and implemented." Branson explains that the educational model is based on the classrooms of the ancient Romans. This was a good model, but he says that we've taken it to the upper limit of what it can do. He argues that more original research is needed to come up with entirely new ways of doing education. Ways that are not based on teacher-lecturers, but on individual-learners.

I interpreted the article to be about guiding students' learning. Instead of a teacher lecturing a classroom with an occasional activity, Branson would like to see teachers restructure instructional design in such a way that students' learning could be individualized. For example, (as we've discussed) journaling conversations could be implemented within a course. Another possibility would be that the teacher could facilitate students' independent research by teaching about how to effectively use the library, internet, etc, and the students could (with guidance) find information on their own. (Of course, as you probably guessed, I see this as an example of the importance of information literacy training.)

In general, I agree that the article is calling for a major overhaul, and I don't think society is anywhere near ready for something of that magnitude. But incorporating aspects that are more individual and less mass-produced, one-size-fits-all, could be a good first step.

multiple selves (adapted BB post)

2005-02-08T21:43:00.000-05:00

For someone interested in postmodern thought and multiple selves, Sherry Turkle's Who Am We? article is a great read. I found the description of separating selves particularly interesting in light of this course. I, too, find it easier to operate within multiple windows, breaking activity up into separate categories. For example, multiple IM windows are easier to deal with than a chatroom or MOO with several lines of discussion at one time.

We operate in a society that suggests breaking our existence into separate categories: work, family, friends, school, etc. However, as we've talked about in class, the lines aren't always so clear-cut. Our work experience may inform our academic studies. Our family life may give a new light to a certain discussion topic. It seems to me that, like the Thich Nhat Hahn Being Peace ("There is a Cloud in this Piece of Paper") said, everything is interconnected. Perhaps instead of focusing on compartmentalizing existence we should work to bridge areas of our life and focus on the interconnections.

wisdom teeth! (part 2)

2005-02-08T14:03:00.000-05:00

Whoa... the healing process is much worse than anticipated. I'm still home from work and I'm still on the heavy medication. Though I'm still not feeling well, I'm feeling a little more alert than I have in the past five days, so I'm going to contribute a little more today between medication, hot presses, and napping. Bear with me... I'm still not entirely mentally here, my typing is off, and I'm forgetting simple things (I even had to look up if I used "bear" correctly), but I'll contribute as best I can!

Social Networks (adapted BB post)

2005-02-03T22:26:00.000-05:00

I took a look at the how to do social network analysis site tonight. It reminded me (again) of parts of my life that I wouldn't have automatically associated with instructional design. (I should have learned by now that everything is connected!)

Social Network Analysis is really interesting to me. One of my acquaintances is working on a PhD in the equivalent of complex systems and has done some really interesting work in this area.

Have any of you all heard of Friendster or Orkut? They're fun tools to see the connections between people. Orkut even lets you use interests to find people with whom you are likely to get along.

I read a book a few summers ago, Linked: How Everything Is Connected to Everything Else and What It Means for Business, Science, and Everyday Life, by Albert Las Barabasi, about networks. It also discussed the idea of "nodes." The author suggested that by communicating with the nodes a person could distribute information more effectively. (The idea is that nodes have wide reach and communicate with many, so if the node buys into information, (s)he will share the information with others. This could be useful with curriculum design... the idea of getting buy-in from the key players in a group to make the lesson seem "cool" to everyone.

Further Project Description

2005-02-03T22:24:00.000-05:00

After the last week of conversation, I feel that I have a better understanding of instructional design now. I understand it more as a framework now, which I didn't before. That's the third part of the equation Bob gave in his audio/powerpoint presentation: "Audience + Content + Structure = Instruction," structure. I've also already learned a lot about the usefulness of dialog in a classroom setting. (even for those of use who are shy!) I'm interested in investigating the use of conversation and writing for reflective purposes in curriculum.

So the next level of project definition? As i've been saying, specifically I would like to apply principles to a presentation I'm giving in March, but generally I'd like to formulate an articulated statement that is geared towards being (at least a foundation for) a publishable paper about using instructional design for information literacy at a college level. Sue is talking about journaling in some way... I'd like to talk to her a bit about that.

I think that I do have my heart and mind around a project that will make a difference. I'm passionate about the topic of my presentation: supervising younger workers. I have extensive experience in student development and I find that approaching managing students with that mindset has been extremely useful for me as a "boss" but also for my students in terms of learning about responsibility. I think my enthusiasm & the self selecting nature of the participants will make a difference for this project, too.

As for the heart and mind for the information literacy paper? I believe I have heart because information literacy applies to my personal ethical system and mind because it's intellectually stimulating. The topic is often relevant to students because they can see that a strong foundation in information literacy will help them in other courses but also in their "real" life. I think that all of this makes a difference, and I'd like to be a voice in the discussion of this newly developing matter.

So, does making a difference matter? I think it does. Everyone (at least everyone I know) wants to make a difference in the world. I see projects and work as an extension of that.

Defining the project? I don't think that defining necessarily means making the project smaller. It's more of a matter of clear and more definite goals.

IL standards

2005-02-03T22:01:00.000-05:00

Sue and I sent some emails back and forth... and it got me thinking about Information Literacy standards for K-12 vs. college/universities. This isn't applicable exactly to instructional design, but it's very applicable to the goal of articulating how instructional design can be used to facilitate information literacy for students.

Sue reminded me that the American Library Association, through the American Association of School Librarians has published Information Literacy Standards for K-12 educators.

I've been aware of the Information Literacy Standards for Higher Education through the Association of College and Research Libraries, part of ALA, for a while.

What are the similarities and what are the differences in the IL standards for K-12 and college/university educators? I was planning on considering a few questions in this vein tonight, but I'm falling behind on my "todo" list before the surgery, so I'll put this on my "todo" list of things to do when I'm not well enough to go back to work, but I'm too well to spend all my time sleeping.

(Also, while looking for the ACRL link to IL standards, I ran across some other useful standards in light of this course: Guidelines for Instructional Programs in Academic Libraries and Objectives for Information Literacy Instruction: A Model Statement for Academic Librarians. I'll come back to these two later and discuss them in a future blog entry.)

wisdom teeth!

2005-02-03T21:28:00.000-05:00

Just a note to let you all know that I'm going to be missing from the conversation for a few days. Tomorrow morning I'm going to get all four wisdom teeth extracted. The oral surgeon said that it will be a little more complicated than normal and to expect to be out of it for a few days. So, I'm going to do some posting on Blackboard and on the blog tonight, but I'll probably not show up again until Sunday or Monday. I'm sorry I'll be missing, and I hope (for a number of reasons) to be well enough to participate again soon!

Intense MOOing

2005-02-02T22:31:00.000-05:00

We had our third MOO session tonight. We discussed some of our feelings about how the course is going and our expectations, and at times it was pretty intense! I felt it breaking down into writers/non-writers, those who post quickly and often/those who add fewer and more thought-out posts, and those who think that the course should require more/less time.

We all come to the course from different backgrounds and perspectives and we all have different goals and wishes for what we want to gain from the course. Designing a course for instructional design with such different students is quite a challenge!

At this point we're starting to develop opinions for what works and what doesn't for our own personal learning style: another interesting consideration for an instructional design course. If students prefer a wide array of choices, it's a good indicator that we should allow for that in the design of a course.

By the end of the hour things were a bit calmer, and we had a better understanding of our fellow students. Now, if only I could find some of y'all online for an IM conversation. :)

Personal New Instructional Opportunity

2005-01-31T21:10:00.000-05:00

It's pretty clear that I really like Information Literacy and would like to teach in the field. However, as someone holding just a few BAs, I don't really have the qualifications to do at a university level at this point. So, I started school again, in part, to help me position myself to teach these courses.

I've let a few people at work know about my interest, and a "perfect storm" of a high demand for the course, a significant amount of time grading on the part of the instructors, and working towards my MLIS combined to allow me the opportunity to move in the direction of teaching LIS undergraduate courses.

Starting after fall break I'll be sitting in on an Information Literacy course at WFU. It's a one hour course that meets twice a week, so I'll get the entire course from beginning to end. After I complete that I'll be able to be (essentially) a TA. I'll help with grading, move about the classroom providing one-on-one assistance as needed, etc. After I've leapt that hurdle I'll get to co-teach with some of our librarians.

I'm absolutely thrilled to have this opportunity, particularly so early in the game for me. I won't have control of the curriculum, which is understandable as there's a whole team of people who have a lot of experience with the course, but I'll get some basic experience.

I hope to use the time to consider how the curriculum is designed and offer behind-the-scenes suggestions when I have them. I'm glad to get started on this so quickly... it'll be nice to be in this course and the LIS course at the same time. Perhaps this will aid in my more general goal of an articulated statement regarding instructional design and information literacy. (How handy that it happens just after my specific goal of the support staff conference presentation!)

assorted BB posts

2005-01-30T14:09:00.000-05:00

I , too, am interested in finding and creating meaning through writing. It's likely that I have that interest as well because of a shared background of journaling. (I've kept notebooks--not diaries, these books are filled with commentary on classes, society, etc-- since the middle of high school.)

I'm trying to figure out how to incorporate this into my general project for this course. I'm still working on defining this, but I'd ultimately like to have some sort of articulated statement on the application of instructional design principles for information literacy on a college level.

I just found out that I'll get to start TAing for the WFU information literacy classes after spring break. I'm looking forward to this. After that experience I'll get to co-teach the courses as well. I wonder if there would be a way to apply journaling to a course that (at least at this point) assigns very technical assignments (such as specific format bibliographies, etc.)

********************************************************************

I also wonder about how we can "mass-educate while providing a unique educational experience for every child" without putting children into stereotypical boxes. I worry that it'd be just as bad to assume that all girls learn the same way as to assume that all boys and girls learn the same way.

How can we mass-educate and take time to consider each student as a person as per the readings from last week? (Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together by William Issacs)

********************************************************************

Hi Sue, we seem to think of a lot of things in the same way (I just posted about how we both have journaling in common, too)! Did you see Kris's post about her book? It mentioned hormones, too. I think that there is probably a difference based on hormones, but that society affects how pronounced the hormonal difference will be. (Smaller societies may tend to be more egalitarian as they don't require such specific gender roles, larger societies may require more pronounced roles, etc.) Kris's book also pointed out that even if there are homornal differences, there will be exceptions, so I'd hesitate to create a "female" or "male" specific lesson, just as I'd hesitate to create a "one size fits all" lesson for a class of 40 individuals.

I keep coming back to thinking of people as individuals, which requires a more individual interaction, which always leads me back to journaling and reflective dialog...

********************************************************************

Yes, this would have been my response. I've had conversations with some of my friends where they thought that gender is tied to sex because their parents (or someone they knew) treated a child from birth neutrally and the child still developed "feminine" or "masculine" gender characteristics that "matched" their sex. But even the most egalitarian family that role models equality and provides opportunities for their children to break out of stereotypical roles still operates within a context. Children's peers, other adults, marketing, media-- everything a child interacts with-- sends a message about how to "fit" into society, and creates pressure to conform to their sex role.

I'm not sure about emotional attachment. I'm people form emotional interest independently, but I also am sure that some emotional interests evolve out of expectations. For example, in middle school I got really involved with music (I played a woodwind... a "feminine instrument") and with a math club. I received very positive reinforcement for my achievemnets in music. I received good reincforceent from my parents for the math group, but most of the other members were boys, the teacher was a man, and I was rarely given any support within that group, so I refocused my interest. By the end of the year I didn't really care about the math group, but I would have done anything to stick with the musicians. Fast forward five years and I was in still in band, but I was majoring in a subject that only required 3 hours of math.

And yes, I realize this is antidotal, but for me it was pretty clear that the emotional tie was formed in large part because of the reinforcement of the people that surrounded me.

********************************************************************

It's so troubling to me that there are situations like the one Bob described, where girls having an option for basketball or cheerleading, while boys only have one option. I don't think we've made progress unless all people have access to a fuller range of possibilities.

I often wonder about the current movement in this direction. It extends far past childhood. It's crazy to me that I could wear a men's shirt to work, and no one would think a thing about it, but that if a man were to wear women's clothing people would think there was something wrong. Women can choose nearly any career and few people would think of her as unfeminine, but there are so many careers that men would be criticized for working in due to their feminine connotations. Women's and Gender Studies is just as interested in promoting equality in accepted behaviors for men as it is in promoting equality for women's oppportunities.

It seems like it'd be important to incorporate safe options into the design of a course to allow for students to explore their interest without judgment for their "fit" into their sex role.

sex & gender (adapted BB post)

2005-01-27T22:03:00.000-05:00

We're discussing gender and learning on Blackboard, specifically the implications of differences in girl's and boy's brains. Here's what I had to say:

Oh my. I feel the need to pitch in pretty early on this topic as a Women and Gender Studies minor who also considers the implication of gender in all other areas of study and life.

In the beginning coursework for this area of study students and scholars have to accept a pretty basic tenant: that though "male" and "female" (and the biological spectrum in-between) are genetic and observable factually (via physical characteristics or via genetics), "feminine" and "masculine" (and everything in-between) are socially constructed. The academic field of Women's Studies requires a belief in this basic tenant just as Economics requires students accept that people desire money (and that they will want to spend the least amount of money possible), music students have to accept Music Theory, and French Literature scholars must accept French grammar.

So, I'd say that "female" is biological while "feminine" is social.

I find the brain research discussing differences in the male and female brains is very interesting. I'm working on looking for some research to back up a hypothesis of mine, that perhaps a difference in the brain comes from socialization.

I think this in part because of Zull. He indicates that learning physically changes the brain. If we treat little girls and boys differently, would it really be that surprising if their brains developed differently and therefore boys and girls learn better in different settings and situations?

I look forward to seeing this thread develop. I'm (unfortunately) going to be without internet through the middle of the weekend. I'll try to post again tomorrow and I really look forward to seeing what we're discussing in this thread when I'm back in town!

Knowledge Studies

2005-01-26T20:02:00.000-05:00

When I made the decision to enroll in the MLIS program, I saw it as an opportunity to develop a professional voice, learn about the field of librarianship, and gain practical knowledge that I would be able to use on the job. Though I have always enjoyed learning and school, I didn't really see the MLIS program as an opportunity to study ideas in the "frivolous" way that I could in my undergraduate career.

One of my favorite topics is the social construction of knowledge. And it's very interesting from a philosophical, sociological, communicative perspective. I had no idea that I'd be able to continue examine this area in graduate school in a legitimate way. My term paper for Foundations of Library Studies course dealt, in part, with the cyclic nature of hierarchy defines our world, which affects classification hierarchy, which affects how we define our world and incorporate new subjects (and on and on).

This course is allowing me to consider how the nature of communication affects the social construction of knowledge. We discuss "virtual" versus "real" environments and the implications of those on learning. We make postmodern assumptions about knowledge.

I'm excited about all of this.

I don't really have an academic plan for after I earn my MLIS. I know that I'll want (and need) to get at least a second masters, so it's exciting to consider the possibilities of this line of thought both within the MLIS program, but also wherever the next path leads me.

Reflections on Public Communication & Private Writing

2005-01-25T23:02:00.000-05:00

I was talking with John’s mom, a professor, yesterday about this course when I realized that for the first time in my life, every action I take within a course will be recorded. It’s weird, to me, to think about the fact that every time I volunteer anything to the discussion it will be documented. In a traditional (classroom) class a shy person may show that they are involved with the lesson using body language, and not speak out at all. In a MOO you can be just as involved, but if you don’t comment every once in a while the rest of the class may think that you’ve left and are hanging out in your kitchen. It’s a different world here!

It makes me wonder a little about the nature of existence. (Stick with me; I think this applies to instructional design…) I’m going to phrase this in first person, but it applies to everyone. If everything I say is recorded, what does that say about who I am? Is my sum participation what I put out there for the public to read? I would normally say that no, existence is made of a lot more than that. However, existence in terms of class really isn’t much more. I might be thinking about other things, but if I don’t put them out there, I might as well not be. How does this change participation from a regular class? It doesn’t seem like there’s much difference. If you don’t say anything in an in-person class, it’s left unsaid as well. But in that situation physical presents makes it blatantly obvious that there is more to existence than your participation. In an online course it’s somewhat less clear (since if you never participate it’d be easy to forget about the person’s participation). So, I’m not really sure about the nature of existence in terms of online courses, but I think it’s probably something to consider when designing an online course. (I think this one is nice in that it allows for multiple ways of participation. If someone’s not that good on their feet, there are places for well-thought-out entries. If a person doesn’t like that type of writing, there are real-time opportunities.)

I checked out the article Bob posted on Blackboard, The Common Place MOO: Orality and Literacy in Virtual Reality by Don Langham, and the 1994 article also pointed out some interesting aspects of conversations in virtual vs. “real” environments. Langham points out that Socrates (via Plato) criticized writing because it encouraged a movement from a public sphere to a private sphere. Really, writing is quite isolating. I said before that I like writing as a way to have a conversation with myself about what I’m thinking about, but it is a one-sided conversation (or two-sided if I’m reading), which is more limited than a genuine conversation with someone else. I was particularly interested in the article’s discussion of how the “isolating quality of writing” coincides with the “dehumanizing practices of western capitalism.” Often, in philosophy, we’ll talk about the objectification of ideas as though it’s a good thing. (Because it’s in print and exists freely from the author.) In women’s studies we’ll talk about objectification as a negative thing, because of the dehumanization that comes along with objectification of people or ideas that affect people. I hadn’t thought about how the objectification goes hand-in-hand with the isolation, but it makes sense in retrospect.

At this point in the article I was feeling a little down. We are a reading and writing culture. If it’s the root of isolation and dehumanization, then we’re stuck. Fortunately, Langham discusses Harnard’s revolutions, and I felt more hopeful. Harnard said there are four revolutions of communication: speech, writing, movable type, and electronic (we’d talked about this in communication studies). MOOs and other electronic communication does allow for a more public, less isolating form of dialog. Ideas can be exchanged and shared in a more democratic way. I was particularly motivated by his idea of literacy in the future: that there will be a new type of literacy that involves co-work, communication, and common causes. It’s nice to imagine a future with “new literates themselves valued to the extent that they are team players, not traditional intellectuals.”

To bring it abruptly back to instructional design: If we accept the idea that there is a new type of literacy and a new way of interacting with people, then it seems that instructional design should be created in such a way that will allow or foster people’s abilities in real-time communication. MOOs are an excellent example of that, as well as students sharing their writing with each other, instead of only giving it to the teacher, and encouraging dialog about students’ work.

Self-Assessing & Future Applications

2005-01-25T22:36:00.000-05:00

I've been very excited to be part of this class. I feel that I'm in a good position to learn an awful lot from the course materials and fellow classmates who have entirely different academic and professional backgrounds. In the beginning I wasn't even entirely sure what the topic of "infrastructure" would exactly cover. Now that I have a better idea, I even have some tools to take with me.

Flexibility
I already valued flexibility, as made clear in my philosophy of design entry. I hadn't really thought much about why, or how I incorporated flexibility, I just knew it made me feel better once I was acting out the design. After reading the articles (and playing with Soda Play), participating in Blackboard discussions, and having a Yahoo Instant Message session with Sue, I feel that I can more clearly articulate why flexibility is important for instructional design. Specifically, flexibility is important in Information Literacy (IL) teaching.

IL librarians teach in all kinds of contexts. A librarian may teach a history class one morning and a political science class that afternoon. Obviously, a lot of content isn't going to carry over. However, if a basic design has been created, a librarian may be able to flesh out the aspects that are needed for each class within that one design. Another example of a need for flexibility is happening at my work, right now. Wake Forest is currently supporting a wonderful IL program. Our new IL librarian has designed notebooks so that whenever a new IL instructor starts, they have a ready-made curriculum. Of course, there's needed flexibility in that, where instructors can adapt the lesson plan to best fit the class and the perspective they want to teach from.

Systems Thinking
I'm also a big fan of systems, or holistic, thinking, though I hadn't actually articulated how important it is for instructional design. I was reminded of this way of seeing the world through the Clouds reading and the Thinking websites. Blackboard conversation, previous studies, and personal experiences helped me reflect on the topic and apply systems thinking to instructional design for IL courses.

I have an academic interest in the rise of multidisciplinary studies. I also think that even subjects that fall into one discipline are more interdisciplinary than they seem (for example, physics overlaps with math or English overlaps with history and grammar and philosophy). IL is extremely interdisciplinary, as it's an overarching skill that can be applied to any course of study. When teaching IL, a librarian has to be aware of not only how students will use IL within their current course, but also how they will use the skills beyond the instance of that class (in other courses, at other institutions, at work, in the "real world," etc.).

Intrinsic Rewards
I find the discussion of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards interesting, and I was glad to see it arise in the Zull reading. It seems like it'd be obvious that the best learning happens when students are emotionally and personally engaged with the subject matter, but it's clear that education isn't always set up to support that kind of teaching. External rewards are the norm, with grades, honor rolls, and honor societies motivating students to cram information in their brain so that they can regurgitate it for an assignment.

However, (perhaps luckily) extrensic rewards aren't always a possibility for IL. My co-workers have discussed how bibliographic instruction(BI) session lack grades (or really, any external reasons) since they are just a one session meeting. Students have to really want to learn what the librarians teach in a BI course. They might be interested because they have an assignment coming up and want to do well on that, but it's rare for the student to be interested in the BI for its own sake. When I imagine my future position (hopefully, again, as an IL librarian) I have to consider what will personally be interesting to the student and what emotional factors might create a real interest in the subject.

Tools as a Means
(...not as an end.) I’ve been in classes that did not use any tools. They were just standard lecture, listen classes. I’ve been in classes that had all kinds of cool technology tools, but they were just another thing we had to learn, not something to facilitate learning. In college and graduate school I’ve finally started having instructors and professors who understood technology tools could be useful for learning, not something to impede it. In light of this experience, I found Pea’s article to be very interesting, and sections of it were very accessible. I like the idea of encouraging learners to use tools creatively and in ways that aid their learning, and I can see that being an important aspect of education. In addition to Pea’s article, Scott’s blog helped me think about this in terms of learning styles. (I had written a comment for his post, but it doesn’t seem to show up right now.) Similarly to using different teaching methods for different learning styles, different technology uses can be used to facilitate learning. Our class is a great example of that. Between MOO, Blackboard, blogs, and YIM, people can find some area they are most comfortable in and use that area to reflect and learn to their best ability.

It’s particularly important to encourage students to use technological tools in creative ways in IL instruction. Twenty years ago there were only card catalogs, no OPACs, ten years ago search engines were just emerging. Five months ago there was no Google Scholar. Who knows what the future of information holds. The goal should be to help students learn how to deal with new technology and to use it to their best advantage. Often people who have some room to play come up with the best uses of new technology, too.

My Project
For the general aspect of my project, I’d like to generate some ideas that could be the foundation for a paper about instructional design for information literacy(that potentially could either be presented or published). I’m already thinking in this mindset, as illustrated above. I can certainly expand on the four main points listed above and evaluate how others who have more experience with IL have used them. I'm not sure I'll be at a point to write a paper or create a presentation dealing with this topic by the end of this course, but it's something to work towards.

I also have a specific aspect that I’d like to include in my project. I will be giving a presentation in March for a paraprofessional library worker workshop at ECU. This presentation will be for a group of paraprofessionals dealing with supervision of younger workers. In studying infrastructure I know to include flexibility for my audience; I have no idea who will be in the room that day, nor what their background will be. I would also like to consider the audience in an holistic way: how their job as a supervisor affects their work life or their personal life, what aspects of supervision could improve their work environment, what aspects of supervision could improve their workers’ lives. I’ll also have to make sure to provide for intrinsic rewards. Fortunately, I know that the people who select this session will probably want to be better supervisors or they wouldn't be there. Theoretically they'll be in my session because they want to learn. I’ll also want to point out that tools can be valuable, if used appropriately for their workers. I won't have the opportunity to use tools in the class (the sessions will be set up in a lecture style) but I might be able to share how I’ve integrated the use of Blackboard, AIM, and listservs into my supervision (and how I adapt when I have students that aren't interested in any of the above).

Practices of Distributed Intelligence and Designs for Education

2005-01-25T11:06:00.000-05:00

I read "Practices of Distributed Intelligence and Designs for Education" by Roy Pea (in Distributed Cognitions) a while ago. I'm still letting it sink in, but I thought I'd go ahead and post a little of my thinking on the chapter.

Though I don't typically think in the context of a classroom or learning environment, I'm very interested in the nature of society, how it changes, and how that changes our understanding of reality. In that sense, Pea was right up my alley.

I'm looking forward to our MOO discussion, when we go over Pea's article in detail and I can find out what aspects I was supposed to take as main points. But for now, this is what most interested me:

On page 47 Pea points out that “[a]nyone who has closely observed the practices of cognition is struck by the fact that the ‘mind’ rarely works alone. The intelligences revealed through these practices are distributed—across minds, persons, and the symbolic and physical environments, both natural and artificial.” This class is a perfect example of that. Most of our learning happens in interaction, either with the internal/virtual dialog we have with ourselves while we read or with the discussion with our classmates via YIM, MOO, or Blackboard. When I think back on the classes that have had the farthest reaching impact on my intellectual life, they've all been classes that (at the very least) strongly encouraged open, non-threatening, discussion.

On page P48 Pea states, “[k]nowledge is commonly socially constructed, through collaborative efforts toward hared objectives or by dialogues and challenges brought about by differences in persons’ perspectives.” Eh, for me this is more of an epistemological statement regarding the nature of knowledge. I happen to believe that the knowledge that we have is socially constructed in one way or another. Since this is a belief of mine, it makes the statement appealing for use in my philosophy of instructional design. It gives me another reason to focus on the use of dialog in a learning context.

Now, through a lot of the article I often felt like I was in just over my head. This is probably because I lack an educator's vocabulary. (I'm working on that this semester.) In other subjects I have some background to plug new information into. I have an understanding of the research that's been done. I just don't have that for education, so I muddled through the article as best I could. Fortunately, by the time I got to the conclusion, I felt like I at least understood the main points Pea was getting across.

What a radical idea (based only on my public school education which spanned from the early eighties to the late nineties) that education should move from tool-free to using tools in novel ways. Sure this manifested in math with the use of fancy calculators and science with labs, but generally the tool was just another thing that was being taught, not a way of enhancing learning.

I appreciated what I interpreted as Pea's thought that students should be encouraged to learn to use tools in novel ways as a method of dealing with their knowledge/learning environment. In doing so, students would be thinking originally and creatively, as well as learning the skill of adaptability that would serve them no matter the changes in the technological environment of the future.

So, these were the main points of interest for me... I look forward to our MOO discussion to see what else emerges!

The Art of Changing the Brain (adapted BB post)

2005-01-23T14:16:00.000-05:00

The James E. Zull piece, "What is 'The Art of Changing the Brain?'" was interesting. I'm looking forward to reading more Zull. It's amazing to me that successful teachers actually manifest neurological changes!

However, it's not all that surprising that it's an art to teach someone. I've had many teachers that were clearly knowledgeable in their subject area and knew the current educational theory, but weren't effective in conveying information. I've also had teachers who maybe didn't know everything, but they were skilled at getting the students to understand the information they were presenting and they were good at inspiring students to learn more than the class required. Those teachers were the artists.

I appreciated Zull's discussion of emotion and feelings. The artist-teachers that I've had generally could link into emotional or feeling aspects of a subject. If we're designing instruction for use in a classroom we might not have any control over if our teacher will be an artist or not, but we can build in opportunities to engage in positive emotions and feelings. (It seems pretty common-sense that positive emotions can facilitate good learning which, in turn creates positive feelings, but I'm glad it was articulated in print. It's another one of those cycles that keeps emerging in our course!)

For me, Zull's piece focused on designing instruction so that learning is rewarding by evoking emotion and relating naturally to the learner. This is particularly relevant for Library Instruction. In the case of presenting bibliographic instruction to a course, the librarian may only see the students once and won't be able to use extrinsic motivators such as grades or extra credit. In these cases it's important for the librarian to understand what is actually important to the user and build on that.

The Design of Learning Environments (adapted BB post)

2005-01-23T14:10:00.000-05:00

Chapter six of How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School discussed the design of learning environments. I was really surprised about the change in the aims of education. It's hard to believe that there was a time when the goal was for students to be able to sign their name. I thought it was interesting that the article talked of a move from mass education to learner-centered. It's clear that we still have mass education goals, as per standardized tests. It seems like a big challenge to be learner-centered when what the learner needs might not match up with the mass education goals.

I enjoyed the sections of knowledge-centered and community-centered environments. I particularly think that the community is an important aspect of learning. Not only the classroom community, but the learner's community of friends, family community, neighborhood community, etc. Everything takes place in a context, and this context affects what is taking place. (Sort of like the idea of cycles that we're using in this course.)

The section dealing with television was a little scary to me. I understand that the majority of kids see a lot of television today and that sometimes it is educational. I've seen good examples of television helping children understand that the world is bigger than their own. My big fear is of the underlying messages being sent by most television. The teevee we see is still extremely American-centric. It's also extremely mainstream: white, middle class, heterosexual, etc. It's a business that is funded by advertisement, and advertisers do not have children's best interests in mind. (Which makes me think of a book I'm currently reading, Branded, about marketing to tweens and teenagers.)

I absolutely adore the work of Neil Postman. A lot of his work deals with the implication of technology on education. His book, Amusing Ourselves to Death is a great book dealing with issues of television, entertainment, and (to some extent) the impact of the entertainment culture on education. Several years ago I read his book, The End of Education, which carries some implications for our course now. I have it around the house somewhere; I'll see if I can dig it up and find out what would be useful for instructional design.

Negotiation for Instructional Design

2005-01-22T18:00:00.000-05:00

I found the points made in Negotiation Tips to be good guidelines for general conversations, not just negotiation in the typical "let's make a deal" sense. This is good for any interaction, including co-designing (or instructing for that matter).

For the "let's make a deal" type of conversation, I particularly thought the mention of shifting power dynamics was useful. Dynamics of power do change, and often they change swiftly. It's good to keep in mind during negotiation, and it's something positive to keep in mind if things aren't going as well as one would hope.

I also liked the articulated BATNA (Best Alternative to A Negotiated Agreement). This would occur fairly early in the design process for me. It'd be part of the wild speculation period where I'd consider all possible aspects. This article reminded me to keep in mind the BATNA for the other party. I don't regularly try and think of this, but it's a good thing to be aware of when starting negotiations.

Four Secrets of Learning Masterful Conversation by Loren Ekroth went well with the Negotiation website. I particularly liked the idea of conversation skills as "process knowledge" as opposed to "cognitive knowledge." Negotiation is something that isn't comfortable for me. Perhaps with practice I could gain confidence and learn to be more effective (as well as comfortable).

Technology Meets Constructivism (adapted and extended BB post)

2005-01-22T17:37:00.000-05:00

As the only student (that I'm aware of) in this class without a background of some sort in education I've found myself looking up many terms that are mentioned off the cuff in discussion. One of these is constructivism. (Boy, was I glad to have some understanding of this before reading this article!) I'm particularly pleased to see constructivism come up again and again because it fits well with my perspective of epistemology, that knowledge is created by humans and, in turn, impacts humans understanding of future knowledge (which is entirely cyclic). This is part of the reason I subscribe to postmodern thought. If knowledge is constructed within humans' existence, then it is relative to those who created it. I have a hard time accepting absolutes.

So, since I'm knew to this field, I figured that constructivism might have a little more in common with this line of thought than it does. When reading David Perkins's Technology Meets Constructivism: Do They Make a Marriage I was surprised by the rigid five faceted learning environment. I wondered what was left out. If we accept systemic thinking (as per the last blog entry) we can't really break the learning environment into component parts. There's an entire system at work. Co-learners, educational background, academic talents, family, etc. all play a part in the learning environment for students.

Technology in the classroom is not quite how it was envisioned in the early 90s, either. I was in a school that had a computer in every classroom in those days. The teachers told us that they thought technology held a lot of promise for education. Even at that time I wondered about what I'd later understand as the "digital divide." The only way we could use technology in a fair way that didn't assume all students had equal access outside of school would be in very task-oriented ways. Only in my college and graduate school years have I seen technology emerge as a way to aid learning (and not just as a task manager). This course is useful as a way of exploring different ways of using technology within an online course. It's nice to learn about using technology in teaching by participating rather than only reading about studies.

Now that I'm in an environment where it is acceptable to assume all students have a similar technology option outside of the classroom (at least via computer labs) I'm beginning to experience what I heard about over a decade ago. I do find active discussion boards, IMing, etc. as a useful method to have more intimate, supportive learning environments. However, like most ways of learning, this entirely depends on the student.

I realize from talking with peers in the Library and Information Studies progam that everyone comes from a different technological background. This difference (and unequal comfort level) leads to alternate ways of using technology. Not everyone learns the best in this environment as not everyone learns best by reading or listening to a lecture. The trick may be to balance options so that students have many options when it comes to learning (just as good teachers try to use both visual aids to target students who don't learn best from listening to a lecture).

Thinking Websites (adapted BB post)

2005-01-22T17:08:00.000-05:00

I've read through the thinking websites that were posted in the Challenge Cycle one, week two folder, and have a few comments on some of the pages that I thought I'd include here.

I was very excited to see the link to the Systems Thinking site. It is pretty natural for me to think systemically, which is perhaps why I always leaned away from the sciences (which break things down into discrete parts to be solved). The website reinforced my understanding of systemic thinking, that by processing information in this way a thinker considers how the thing interacts with other aspects of system rather than breaking the thing apart from its context. How does holistic thinking apply to instructional design? I think it applies in several ways. The designer must consider the individual students holistically, in terms of their context and background. The designer must consider the class, itself, holistically. The designer also needs to consider the subject matter holistically. Many subjects can be more interdisciplinary than they first appear, by presenting them in such a way students can latch on to the aspect that they are most interested in and understand the topic from their perspective.

Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together by William Issacs builds on this (and emphasizes our ID class's model). If you consider dialogue to require an appreciation of the other person as a person, then it's easy to think about their context and think about them in a holistic way. I also appreciated Issacs's "Four Essential Behaviors" that included basic, good ways of interacting with people in general. If applied to instruction, it requires seeing the students as real beings, coming from their own backgrounds, and suspending preconceived assumptions.

After we have a systemic understanding of the students, one can consider them in terms of Bloom's Taxonomy. If an instruction plan can guide the students through the six levels of intellectual behavior in learning, a student can be ready to think critically and creatively. I feel that critical and creative thinking builds on Bloom's taxonomy.

Instruction can also be useful in fostering Positive Attitudes for Creativity. If we can guide students to be curious, challenging, constructively discontent, problem solvers, nonjudgmental, optimistic, positively deal with challenges, and consider problems to be interesting, then they will be interested in learning.

YIM, Sodaplay, Thich Nhat Hahn, & Meditation

2005-01-22T15:50:00.000-05:00

Sue and I just had a wonderful YIM conversation for the last hour & both of us accidently closed the window before saving! I looked through the help pages for Yahoo IM and couldn't find any options for setting up a preference for saving all conversations, so I've e-mailed their help desk. I'll let the class know if there is a way to set it up to save all YIM conversations.

Sue and I focused mostly on the Soda Play website and used our play to come up with ideas that can be applied to Instructional Design. The Soda Play site is an amazing example of systemic being. The whole is made of up smaller parts, as well as "external" forces like gravity. Sue and I IMed about how it perfectly illustrates the idea of "less is more," as a three-part triangle is stronger than a four-part square. We also spent a while discussing the white space in a structure. The white space is good. In the case of the Soda Play creature, white space makes the design less confusing and doesn't complicate the illustration with unnecessary lines. This applies to instructional design, too. When creating a design you want to have all that is necessary for the design to work, but leave it empty enough so that it's not confusing. The design also needs to have enough space so that if a given circumstance needs to have an additional "leg," there is room to add it.

Sue pointed out that gravity is a context that the Soda Play creature exists within, similar to students coming into her classroom within a context. In neither case does she have control over the context, so she has to work with it. The Soda Play user has options to work with the context such as stimulating a certain point, or adapting the design as needed, just as an instructor can stimulate or adapt to modify a flexible plan to work with the student's context.

We really like the idea of white space, so in addition to using it as a metaphor for flexibility in design, we used it in terms of reflection. This really brings back my experiences with Service-Learning as an instructional model that makes large use of reflection. We talked about building in reflection time for students with journaling and discussion (just as Service-Learning does). Adapting with how the students use that white space requires flexibility, the other type of white space, for the instructor.

Another area we thought applied well was in Soda Play was stimulation. In Soda Play you can stimulate one area. That might create changes in one area, but leave other areas unaffected. This is like when an instructor presenting information, it might really click with a student coming from one perspective or background, but not register at all with a student from another position. But if an instructor stimulates another point, the original unchanged areas may move, so it's a good metaphor for using different examples and instructional styles.

We also really liked the Thich Nhat Hahn perspective in Being Peace aka "There is a Cloud in this Piece of Paper." Within my context, this spoke loudly about an interconnectedness between everything, suggesting hierarchy and binary opposition is a simplified way of seeing the world. (This comes from my background in systems thinking, gender studies, and postmodern thought.) We considered this piece in terms of how all learners can be connected to any lesson's topic, but probably in different ways. The instructor needs to understand how the learners are connected to the topic in order to give it relevance.

Sue and I didn't overtly talk about Meditation and Emptying the Mind, but we talked about some of the ideas from the website. We talked about how we're both trying to quiet down our minds, which both tend to be a little chaotic. We both practice some form of meditation as a way to deal with this. For me, even journaling is a way of quieting my mind. After I've put an idea on a page (paper or web) I don't feel a need to remember it as clearly, so I can put it out of my mind.

Great YIM discussion... I'm looking forward to reading others on Blackboard!

Service-Learning

2005-01-22T13:17:00.000-05:00

I'm really very interested in Service-Learning. Part of this is because I like the idea of participating in bettering the community, but part of this is because I like the idea of reflecting on learning. This class reminds me of my involvement with Service-Learning at NC State University.

I took a Service-Learning course, presented Service-Learning as an alternative model of education to several groups, and acted as a consultant to the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics to integrate Service-Learning principles with their community service requirements.

Service-Learning is designed to encourage academic enhancement, personal growth, and civic engagement. This (ideally) works because students have intellectually and personally challenging community service projects that go with the topic they are studying. The students spend a significant amount of time reflecting on what they are learning and doing. This reflection enhances what they learn in both the classroom and real-world setting.

The reflection component of Service-Learning is relevant for this course. In Service-Learning reflection occurs in small group discussions guided by a facilitator skilled in reflection, journaling, and online discussion. (Not so different from our class, eh?)

We're not doing Service-Learning here, but it's the first time that I've felt information sink-in the same way I have in my Service-Learning experience. & that's exciting!

MOOing for Class

2005-01-21T20:50:00.000-05:00

I thought our first MOO experience last Wednesday was interesting! It's rare that you can observe/participate in a group of folks all experiencing something relatively new, together. I thought that this was particularly intersting as we discussed rules for Blackboard and MOO communication. Of course there aren't any written laws about how we can interact, but social mores do arise. Our attempts to articulate existing ones showed that we do expet some to arise, and want to learn earlier rather than later.

I found participation to be quite different from a real-world class. I'm one of those shy people that hold back in a seminar setting. In the Blackboard discussion forums I don't feel like I need to hold back as much, so assumed it would be the same for the MOO. What I found there is that I ended up holding back just as much as an in-person class, but for different reasons. In the MOO I would read a post, think about it, and start typing a reply. By the time I had typed a reply, reread it, and gotten ready to post it, the information wasn't always relevant anymore. I'll have to get a little more confident in my gut reaction so that I can post in time for the comment to be relevant!

I also enjoyed having access to Yahoo IM during the MOO session. It was a good way to follow tangent discussions and get to know other classmates. I'm going to try and keep it on more often during the week.

Finally, I find our group very interesting. We come from diverse backgrounds. It was very evident to me during the discussion of internet filtering in schools. I am a library student who early on ruled out school media because I didn't want to act in loco parentis. (I'd ultimately like to work in a university library.) So, it was interesting to me to hear the discussion of internet filtering from teachers (instead of my traditional peer group of library studies).

I'm really interested in how the MOO sessions will evolve with experience... the simultaneous slides and discussion seems like an excellent tool for online learning. The session seemed to fly by, too. I'm looking forward to next Wednesday!

Former Studies (adapted and extended BB post)

2005-01-21T14:36:00.000-05:00

I was interested to see several themes from my undergraduate study emerge during the course of the in-person lecture.

I wrote an independent-study term paper on electronic communication in MOOs and MUDs for my communication degree. This was around 1999, so it’s interesting to see how electronic communication is being used now in the learning environment. I've dug through my old papers (metaphorically... they were archived on an external harddrive) to see what relevant information I could dig up. The focus of the paper was geared towards establishing relationships and gender identity within MOOs and MUDs. The research I drew on was all very preliminary (as it was so early for communication research on electronic interaction) but interesting nontheless.

In 1999 there was still discussion about the nature of relationships, and if an entirely online partnership could be considered a relationship. It's funny that now, just six years later, there is no real question about if these partnerships are relationships. Researchers were also interested in the "narrow bandwidth" of communication possibilities in online interactions. They suggested that since there is a lack of nonverbal and relational cues in online interactions people must find other methods of connecting with their partners (like the use of actions in MOOs or emoticons in e-mail or instant messaging).

Also, while working on the communication degree, I studied a lot of McLuhan. As with a lot of my undergraduate studies, I don't recall a lot of the details of his theories, but I do remember some overarching concepts. I’m interested in the theory tools that he brings to the technical side of instructional design and I'm planning to re-read some of his work now that I'm at this new point in my studies.

Finally, as I’ve said elsewhere, I really enjoy postmodern criticisms of modern constructs, so I’m interested in learning more about the postmodern schools of thought as they apply to instructional design.

Breathing Room (adapted BB post)

2005-01-16T22:36:00.000-05:00

I was interested in the idea of “breathing room” that was discussed during our in-person lecture. On the ride home from class last Wednesday I thought about how busy my life is now. When I was younger I’d spend a lot of time walking in the park in my neighborhood, sitting in my room and daydreaming, just generally spending time thinking about things. And I learned a lot. I didn’t have to spend a lot of time doing homework because I understood what I was being taught by spending time thinking about it.

As I’ve gotten older I’ve gotten very good at partitioning my time so that I don’t “waste” a minute. I multitask and feel very productive. But I end up spending a lot more time studying to cram the same information into my mind that I could possibly understand and learn if I just were to spend some time reflecting on it.

I’m trying to set aside more time for breathing (and thinking and thinking and journaling) already. It’ll be a nice experiment to try in conjunction with this course.

Update: I spoke with another graduate student the other day who is taking 12 hours this semester. I thought back to my undergraduate years when I would take 18 hours a semester. I remember some general themes of my undergrad work, but not a lot of the details. Now I'm working full time and taking one or two classes a semester. I find that in slowing down my formal coursework, what I learn really sticks with me. I can remember a lot of detail from my coursework that just wouldn't "stick" if I were cramming for a full-time load. Perhaps the information is sticking now because I have time to really think about what I'm learning and processing new information.

Design Process and Philosophy (adapted BB post)

2005-01-16T20:50:00.000-05:00

A few years ago, after graduation, my partner and I took a month-long Greyhound bus trip around the country. With a trip of this breadth and continual closeness, we spent a significant amount of time planning. In a sense this trip illustrates not only how I co-design, but also how I design independently. Though we eventually had to come together and combine our plans, we did a fair amount of thinking on our own.

I am big-picture kind of person. (I score heavily as an “N” on the Myers-Briggs indicator.) Because I tend to see things as a big picture I start design processes this way. I like to spend a fair amount of time researching, thinking, chatting with others, and reading. I also like to talk with my closest friends and family about fantastic, out-of-this-world plans (even if I know that there’s no way I’ll actually do them).

This is how the Greyhound bus trip started: What? You can get month long tickets? We could tour North America: Mexico, the US, and Canada! We can sleep every night on the bus to save every second of valuable travel time! We can see 30 cities in 30 days! Then I started reading up on other people’s experiences doing long cross-country trips in the US, reading all I could about some key destinations, talking with friends who had used the Greyhound for long distances. Part of this research even included taking the Greyhound bus to and from Boston to get a feel for sleeping on the bus before sightseeing. I journaled (as I do regularly) about the topic.

As the trip approached I started making plans with the broadest possible framework: 30 days, North America, summer time. Then I narrowed down the framework to a more reasonable scope. This is where I worked more with my co-designer, though I would have done the same process on my own. We picked guidelines, but consciously avoided making rules. For example, we’d aim for two nights in a hostel for every one night on a bus, then repeat. We’d also aim for about two days in each city. This left us with a goal of 15 cities. We both had done a lot of traveling in the north east, so eliminated that. We also knew that the borders may be challenging on bus and we didn’t want to have to keep up with our passports, so we eliminated Canada and Mexico.

Once the scope of the project was reasonable, I picked out a few specific goals that I wanted to accomplish: seeing the Grand Canyon, visit Santa Fe, San Francisco, Seattle, and Chicago. The rest of the trip evolved from those goals.

Finally, we focused on details. The questions became very focused: how much baggage did we really want to carry around? What would be crucial to pack? We also created rules in this phase: we couldn’t carry anything that would really be a problem if it were lost or stolen, etc. Part of the detail work was to make sure the plan has enough flexibility built into it that even if things go awry (and out of our control), the trip won’t be too stressful. We knew if we picked up too much stuff along the way we could mail it home (we didn’t have to). If we got stuck in a city and ran out of time on our bus passes, we would have enough money for a ticket home. We would carry money in hidden money belts and not have too much at any one time.

I knew that the design was done when I felt that no matter what happened we could roll with it. I felt like I had finished planning when I knew that even if the unexpected happened we would be able to safely get home.

In most of my designing I like to consider generalities and the big picture. A large part of this phase is researching. From there I narrow down the scope to a manageable level. I pick guidelines and a few specific goals. From there I focus on specifics and make as many contingency plans as I can. I know I’m done when I feel that I’ll be comfortable no matter the outcome. This requires some flexibility to be built into the design. In doing this I'm not trying to plan for everything, but just enough that there is the ability to do on-the-spot changes as necessary. If I know that surprise situations won't be a problem then I feel like I can be relaxed enough to actualize the design. Of course, things might happen that the plan can’t accommodate, but as long as I feel reasonable sure that I can deal with whatever comes up then I feel like the plan is as finished as it can be.

My tendency is to move from the general to the more specific. My philosophy is two fold: be prepared as possible (do a lot of research, that allows to prepare for multiple possible outcomes) and flexibility (the ability to roll with any of the researched possibilities). I also like to frequently communicate with the ones most affected by my design and make sure that the plan is adaptable enough to compromise with the other party.

At this point in time I don’t teach, but I do give presentations. These tend to be in areas that I know a lot about (or I wouldn’t propose them). Before proposing a presentation I think widely about options. I talk with peers who are knowledgeable about the topic. I read articles, I think about what I would like to know more about, and read some more. I also find about the group—and the space—as well as the constraints for the presentation (what aids will be available, how long I’ll have, etc). Then I narrow my topic and select a few key concepts I’d like the audience to come away with.

When I’m dealing with details I’ll read more specific research and pull together the presentation. I’ll plan for aids & backups in case there are problems (like the projector being broken). Most of all, I to plan to be flexible enough to deal with most possible outcomes.

Project Description

2005-01-16T16:35:00.000-05:00

I am working towards a Masters degree in Library and Information Studies. Within five years I’d like to be an Information Literacy Librarian at a university library. Information literacy exists in many forms. I would like to work in a position teaching regular classes. Information Literacy Librarians help students learn to realize when they need to search for information as well as how to find, evaluate, and use the information found.

Since I’d like to be in a classroom I thought this class would be a good way to explore many aspects of instructional design. My background is in communication, philosophy, and women’s studies. I’ve given many presentations at conferences, but I’ve never formally studied instructional design and I wanted to have a better understanding of it so that I could apply it to bibliographic instruction (also known as BI sessions: one-shot classes, co-designed with the professor, to help students prepare for a specific project) and information literacy courses (semester-long courses designed to help students gain the skills that will be useful both with their classes and the “real world”).

So my project will have two aspects. I’d like to have a better understanding of instructional design: the history, the major thinkers in the field, the criticisms, etc. With this understanding I’d like to be able to articulate how instructional design can be applied to information literacy. I’d also like to gain some practical knowledge that is flexible enough to apply to my work in the future (be it a presentation at a conference, a one-shot BI session in a classroom, or a semester long information literacy course).

In the past I’ve just prepared for presentations in the way I’d write a paper. I’d just add an extra step at the end to figure out how to best present the information to the audience. This might be all I need to do, but I’d like to have more information about what actually works and what would make my teaching more effective.

I’m really excited about all the web-based communication tools. You see this popping up more and more in the library world. Wake Forest University just implemented AIM chat reference. We also use course management software for everything from committees, student employees, to actual courses. I’d like to know more about what’s available out there in this area, and I think I’ll learn a lot from the various technologies in this course.

Essential Questions (adapted BB post)

2005-01-14T17:22:00.000-05:00

The information for this course is very new to me. I haven’t had any education courses before and I don’t regularly teach anything (in the classroom/instructor sense). I find myself looking up education terms that are mentioned in Blackboard, MOO, and Blog discussions.

This is good!

But since I lack a background in the academic study and the practical experience of instruction I’d like to learn about the history of instructional design and the important instructional design theorists. I’d like to see how perspectives of instructional design have evolved over time. What theories are the good old standbys and what theories are the new, cutting edge, memes for the field?

I really like theory. This is likely part of what makes me enjoy philosophy so much. In the past three or four years I’ve become very interested in critical theory. As my interest in this grows, so does my interest in postmodern critiques of modern concepts. (Last semester my term paper for my Foundations of Library Studies course was a postmodern critique of classification and cataloging.)Because of this interest I’d like to learn more about the postmodern critique of instructional design.

Most generally, though, I’d like to gain some general ideas that could apply to many different settings. I find it very hard to envision what I’ll be doing even ten years from now, so I’d like to gain general skills and tools that would be useful in various situations.

Web Presence

2005-01-12T21:33:00.000-05:00

I also maintain a personal site and a blog that deals primarily with library issues.