1. How do the
definitions in the first chapter compare to your own definition of
instructional or educational technology?
My definition of educational technology, before reading the
first chapter, was focused on media. I thought educational technology was all
about a/v and computer technology, not including teachers or any type of “process”.
What experiences or other influences have shaped your definition?
My original definition of educational technology was shaped
by how it was presented to me growing up. In school anything to do with
technology was computers and media. There wasn’t a lot of focus on anything
else.
How has your
definition changed from examining the definitions in the first chapter of this
book?
After reading the first chapter of the book I have expanded
my original definition to include not only the media involved but also the
people and process that is used to deliver the media. I would say now that
educational technology is not separate components but a process of delivering a
whole learning package.
2. Next, think of a
lesson or unit of instruction that you have developed. Or if you haven’t ever
taught or developed instruction, think of one that you have received. How does
that lesson adhere or fail to adhere to the six characteristics of
instructional design?
The first instructions that come to mind are classes I had
in the Army. Army training classes usually follow the same simple format. First
present the information, show the students how to apply the information, and
finally review the information again. While Army classes usually involve some
type of media, be it slideshows or computer, they also have a hands on part
followed by a re-teaching of the information so any problems experienced in the
hands on portion can be resolved. As far as the six characteristics of
instructional design, I think the Army classes are pretty spot on.
1. Student centered. Army classes are taught to a
group but each student must receive a pass individually, so I think the classes
are student centered.
2. Goal orientated. Again as each student must
receive a pass the goal is to put the information to a practical use, so I would
say the classes are goal orientated.
3. Focuses on meaningful performance. A “go/nogo”
practical demonstration of the task is exactly meaningful performance.
4. Outcome can be measured in a reliable and valid
way. As part of the class a soldier will put the information to use in a real
world environment. I can only view this as reliable and valid.
5. Empirical, iterative and self-correcting. Everything
in the Army is scored and recorded so there are always records of performance
and retraining. Since classes have a retrain built in they are self-correcting
in that each soldier will train until he can perform the task.
6. Team effort. Everything in the Army is a team
effort. You train with your fellow soldiers and your success or failure depends
on the team.
How would you
redesign it to better adhere to the six characteristics?
I don’t think Army classes could be better designed
according to this six step list. While Army classes may seem a bit repetitive
or slow to people who learn fast, they are undoubtedly effective.
3. In the 3rd
chapter, Reiser distinguishes instructional media from instructional design,
excluding teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks from the definition of
instructional media. Why?
Personally I think Reiser excluded teachers chalkboards and
textbooks to limit his area of discussion to just other technological media. I
think he did this to narrow the focus and differentiate it from traditional
instruction. I believe an argument could be made to include teachers ect as
instructional media and maybe he made a mistake by excluding them from his
evaluation.
Would you consider teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks instructional
media?
Yes.
Is the purpose of
instructional design to incorporate media into instruction?
I believe the purpose is to facilitate real learning. It is
less important what form instruction takes as long as the goal of real learning
is met. If traditional instruction isn’t getting the desired results, or even
nor optimal results, then other methods should be employed. If technology can
help students learn more effectively, it should be employed. I think some
people get too caught up in the form learning takes rather than focusing on the
end goal of effective real world application of knowledge.
