For my learning environment modeling experience, I worked with other EDU-Innovators to conduct a diagnostic design for the course Technology for School Administration.
The process of working with others to design and develop the online course was very helpful, and I find it to be vital for creating a quality course.
Sherry and I share an office right now, and because of its size, it is not conducive to holding a meeting. If I were to hold a LEDx meeting, I would have it in our department conference room. As you can see in the picture, there is plenty of space in the room, chairs for flexibility, and areas on the walls to hang chart paper and post-it notes to start the LEDx process.
I haven’t facilitated my first design meeting, but I assume it will look a little like the following.
Here is my original design for an activity in my class. This activity helps students properly communicate their vision and purpose of school technology through storytelling.
After applying the LEDx Framework for diagnostic purposes, I discovered that my students needed more time to reflect on peer feedback before posting their thoughts/assignment on their class blog. I also determined that the instructor feedback would have more impact if placed later in the learning model.
Design Challenge #2: Biking with Friends
Step 1: Discover
As with any design process, we need to understand the expectations from everyone involved. If I were biking with a group of friends, I would start out with learning what everyone’s goals are regarding biking. Are they wanting to train for a big race, work to get in shape and loose a few pounds, or just get out and enjoy spending time with friends.
Step 2: Understand
After we have discussed our goals we would work through the previous experiences our group has had with biking and how they see our experience going. We would talk about time commitments, routes, and distances. We may also discuss nutrition, heart rates, and pacing. This would allow me to better understand the goals set by the team.
Step 3: Envision
My next step would be to sketch out a tentative design of our bike ride addressing the desired outcomes of the group. I would present my draft model to my group and get their feedback on our “plan.” We would also do a test run of my model.
Step 4: Build
If there were no changes, I would finalize the plan in electronic format and email it out everyone. Happy riding!
I feel like I have been in design for a hundred years. I can remember learning about all the old, and I mean old, models of Dick and Carey (1978), Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956), and Gagne’s 9 Events of Instruction (1965). These were the tools I use at the beginning of my curriculum design/development and teaching career. My first job as a content and technical document writer required me to use the ADDIE model (1975) for design. I think this model is simple to understand but LOOOOOOOONGGGG, without a place for feedback until after implementation. Very frustrating! My team started to move to the SAM model when I left, and I hear they liked it better, but I haven’t development any content under that model.
My first job as a content and technical document writer required me to use the ADDIE model (1975) for design. I think this model is simple to understand but LOOOOOOOONGGGG, without a place for feedback until after implementation. Very frustrating! My team moved to the SAM model right after I left, and I hear they liked it better, but I haven’t developed any content under that model.
photo credit: http://www.instructionaldesigncentral.com/instructionaldesignmodels
Later in my teaching career, I was trained in what they called Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2000). The process was super simple and became my default design model for classroom instruction.
Stage 1: Identify Desired Results
Stage 2: Determine Acceptable Evidence of Learning
Stage 3: Design Learning Experiences & Instruction
photo credit: http://www.slideshare.net/jaimeo/the-backwarddesign
I often used backward design with the NEW Bloom’s Taxonomy (2002), to develop my content and lessons.
LEMx has similarities and differences among these models. What I like about LEMx is how easy it is to understand and how the process encourages designers to think about other aspects of the design process, like environment, innovation, and feedback.
Here is my blended learning model for my Monday night Tech 4 Admin class.
While thinking about the possible difficulties involved in the learning environment design process, I thought about the following:
- Does the physical or virtual learning environment best support my students learning?
- Do the instructional strategies foster engagement and knowledge retention?
- Are my students provided enough opportunities to show what they know?
- Are my students allowed choice and autonomy around their learning?
- Are the topics related to real world experiences and relevant for the future?
I have selected the Enriched Virtual Model from Pinterest.
At the end of this learning model, there is one evidence building block. This block is considered the outcome of the model. The outcome is the “what will the student learn” building block and in this case, it is a project.
The strategy for this model or the “How will the student learn?” can be found in the following building blocks. These blocks indicate that all students in this learning model will be given the opportunity to hear the information, be provided important practice, discuss content with their peers and get valuable feedback from the instructor. These individual techniques make up the strategies for this learning model.
The system layer of the model, the “how the learning environment is organized to help the learner,” is present in the way the actions of the building blocks are laid out. This model starts with a face-to-face (classroom) meeting that focuses on overall goal setting for the course before students participate in the online portion of the class. I think this system design could be very helpful at building a sense community prior to migrating the learning online.
I think this model would provide a very positive experience for the participants because it allows students to build a community from the face-to-face interactions and them move on to the autonomy of an online learning model. #bestofbothworlds
Technology for School Administrators
One outcome of this course it to have students demonstrate a level of proficiency related to technology in school administration.
Strategies in this class provide students with opportunities to experience and explore different tools that help them better understand how technology fits into the role of school leadership.
The system isn’t one that I would have designed for this course, but it is the one that I was assigned. I’m not a fan of desktop systems that hinder the process of collaboration; however, the system does work in the aspect of allowing the students to have their own device to support individualize learning.
A 1:1 computer ratio is critical for a good technology experience. This setup helps students build a connection with their personal use of technology and provides ample opportunities for hands-on experiences. I think it fosters a student’s proficiency and confidence level.
Update to my post:
I didn’t do a good job fully explaining the experience of a 1:1 classroom environment for adults.
When students have ownership over their learning and can participate in exploration and practice of new knowledge or skills, they are less stressed, frustrated, and overwhelmed by the learning. I think providing a 1:1 learning environment for a technology class is important to help students have a good experience in the class and hopefully learn to love how technology fits into their world. I think it helps them enjoy the class more then they aren’t sharing devices.