Teamwork and Course Design

I decided to partner with Matt to complete our final curriculum project.

At first, I thought the best approach would be to work independently. The Lone Ranger approach is very natural for me as a curriculum designer. And since I already had a topic chosen, I could quickly make progress relying on my own resources.

I decided, however, that I wanted to experience more of a team approach to instructional design. After all, some of my greatest OMET learning experiences have taken place in groups. I have learned so much more from my Cadre teammates then I would ever have alone. Our combined knowledge and experience has been invaluable.

So how would I describe our team approach to this project? It has been an incredible learning experience! Matt is so talented with technology and has such great insight into design. We both were able to share our expertise and experience to create, in my opinion, a very useful curriculum. And even though it took more time to communicate and review each other's work, I believe the final product was much higher quality.

So what does this mean to my practice at work? Simply that there can be tremendous advantages to working with others, especially in designing curriculums. Although we already work in teams to some extent, this should be something we should pursue even more aggressively. And even when we do need to work independently, we should seek input and feedback from others.

There is also an important lesson here for my ARP. I should reach out more and share what I've learned in designing and delivering synchronous classes. This attitude of sharing ideas and knowledge can have such a positive impact within organization. Hopefully, I can influence a more collaborative environment and mirror the same growth as experienced in OMET.

665 Mid-Course Reflection

It's difficult to summarize all I've learned in 665. There are too many new ideas floating in my head, and the class has moved along so fast.

I'm sure this feeling of being overwhelming is a good thing. After all, I usually learn the most when the learning is demanding (good hard fun). It also helps that I am very interested in the topic. Sure, being a curriculum designer is a motivator. However, I think there is something more; I really am intrigued by how people learn, and how they learn best. In addition, I want to understand how curriculum design can play a role in effective learning.

So what some highlights of what I've learned? I was reminded of this while reading Chris's blog last night, but real learning needs to include the "big" picture understanding. I need to find ways to help the users of my curriculum discover the whole context of their learning. For example, how does the troubleshooting of a major biotech system impact the lives of the patients who use our medication? Or in the case of the final project for this class, how does a learner centered approach to instruction enable students to construct their own knowledge?

It's about identifying the enduring understanding for a given topic. What do I want my students to take away from my courses that will have a lasting impact? What will help my students move toward expertise and beyond being simple wrench turners?

And there is so much more I've learned. I now understand, more then ever before, that the quality of the learning is more important then the quantity. It may be time for me to trim my curriculum, and allow learners the space and time needed for deeper learning. I believe our reading called this depth over breath.

A final "big idea" for me was backwards design. Actually, for the most part I have always used some form of backwards design in my work. However, I never really considered the "enduring understanding" as the key ingredient. For the most part, my design has provided the nuts-and-bolts for a given topic, but rarely the deep knowledge needed. This idea of enduring understanding may be the greatest lesson I've learned.

Besides the major lessons I mentioned above, I have enjoyed this class for the actual learning exercises. I have always enjoy working in pairs and small groups. Working with Xing on a case study or with Bernard to critique a video; these were all special and exciting little adventures. My only frustration has been the limited time for some of these assignments. The biggest anxiety in this class came when Xing and I were suppose to download a trial copy of Inspiration and create a mindmap. We had a number of problems to overcome including a slow download on my end (Xing was never even able to download the software) and then a limited amount of time to learn the software and develop our concept. To be honest, I really don't remember what the final "big idea" was for the lesson. (Actually, it might of had something to do with two different approaches that both reached the same learning objective, hmmm). I would have preferred to have had more time to download the software and then be able to focus on the learning (as opposed to spending valuable time on technical issues). Despite the time issue and technical challenges, overall, I have really enjoyed the TI sessions offered by Dr. K. Again, it may be my interest in the topic, but I wish this course ran for at least two semesters.

For the rest of the term, I look forward to the final project. I still feel I need a better grasp of how all of this new understanding fits together. Obviously, it is the final project that will help pull everything together. I'm looking forward to this final challenge!

Curriculum Lessons From Online Learning

Our department's first online synchronous session was completed earlier this week. After I analyze all of the feedback, I'm certain sure my list of curriculum changes will continue to grow.

If measured by my old standard, the pilot was a success. The test scores were even slightly higher then scores from the face-to-face classroom version. These results look good on the surface, but am I really satisfied with the learning. In truth, my prespective of what make a class effective is changing. I desire a course experience where deep learning and understanding occurs, and it happens on a regular basis.

As a result this new desire, I see the need to change the curriculum for many of my classes, beginning with my online troubleshooting course. This involves a moving the focus away from the instructor and toward the students. The curriculum must have learning activities that are meaningful and driven by the learner. Hopefully I can implement some of these changes before the next session.

I have also thought of another strategy to improve instruction. The idea is help instructors understand how to take a constructivist approach to instruction. As for short-term impact, this may be the most effective approach. An instructor who is well grounded in constructivist strategies can hopefully adapt instruction using a current curriculum. I thought about this during our training this week. The instructor could have allowed the students to take control of the learning in several instances.

For example, the instructor guided the student through several troubleshooting scenarios. What if the instructor asked several students to walk the class through the scenarios. They could explain and argue why they made choices. They could even critique the scenario and how the would change it. How knows, they may even be able to create their own scenario. I know the level of participation, which was rather week, would increase dramatically. With this approach, the instructor would naturally step back and take a more facilitator role.

Another example relates to the diagrams presented in class. What if the students led the class through the diagrams and explained the systems? Or better yet, what if the students had to design their own diagrams?

It is exciting and a little overwhelming that there are so many opportunities for change and improvement. Some of it is curriculum based. Other changes will need to happen by the instructors themselves. The key is to keep working toward change, and to have patience even if the process is slow.

Design Dilemma, Part II

My synchronous class is now in its second day, and already I am struggling with the amount content. Is there too much to cover in the remaining time (4 more sessions remaining)? Is it important to cover everything?

During the first day, we easily covered the content scheduled. The pace of the class felt comfortable and manageable. However, in today's session we simple ran out of time and never covered all of the content scheduled. It's interesting, but my instructor and subject expert had no problem with the slower then expected pace. They were excited that the students were beginning to ask more questions and that the pace better reflected the complexity of the content.

Did I misjudge the amount of content? It's possible. But the important point (which is rather exciting) is that the instructor feels that it is more important to focus on quality of the learning (rather the quantity). So my question is this: am I willing to let the learner drive what he or she needs? Are we willing to set aside some of the content, so that certain concepts will be covered more thoroughly? This can be risky. It may mean that the post-test results at the end of the class will be compromised since certain content will be discussed more thoroughly then others. This is quite the dilemma. My initial thought, well grounded from my OMET experience, is that leaning toward increased understanding is worth the risk of low test scores. I believe I am willing to take that risk.

Design Dilemma: Fewer Topics

This past week I have been working to update existing course material; adapting it for online synchronous instruction. My biggest challenge has been the reducing the amount of content being covered. Since I am moving the course from face-to-face to online delivery, I have needed to cut the delivery time in half. This is forcing me and the instructor to teach what is most important for the student, and leave all the rest to self-study. I realized in doing this simple (but difficult) exercise, that it was a constant struggle letting go of content.

Why is that? For me personally, I always struggle with clearing the clutter from my life. My garage is a prime example. I am so afraid of throwing and giving away some things that might, someday, be needed or wanted again. So I understand why I resist removing content from a curriculum. What if the student needs that knowledge someday? Won't that student be more valuable to the organization if he or she understands that fact or policy?

After reading what Howard Gardner said about understanding this week, I am starting to look at this dilemma from a new perspective. Maybe more isn't better. Is it possible that having fewer topics, with more emphasis on the important concepts, will result in greater expertise and understanding throughout the organization? Is it a greater benefit to have students who are much better thinkers, but missing some of the facts? Is it more important and a greater learning strategy to spend more time on a single topic? Should the students spend extra time learning a single topic and using a variety of learning methods (as Gardner would suggest)? I believe so, but this approach is new paradigm for me.

In some ways, it comes back to a trust factor. If I really want to reduce the amount of content in my online class, then I will need help from the students in determining what we will need to cover. After all, they are the only ones who truly understand their greatest needs. It is all about learning priorities for the learner. So I either have the instructor race through a mountain of content, fearing some key concept will be missed, or I allow the students to guide the learning. It's quite the dilemma, but I know the direction I need to take. It's time to start cutting!

Backward Design

The concept of backward design is straightforward, but not always easy to apply. For it to work, one must continually focus on the end result, and resist the temptation to get caught-up in the details alone.

This past week, I begin updating a class to meet the needs of online synchronous instruction (my ARP). One of the main areas of change is to create more interaction throughout the curriculum. Interactivity is needed to help engage the distance learners. This is a worthy effort, but I realize I need to consider the end result of the instruction throughout the redesign. Do these new activities and discussions help meet my objectives, or do they just provide interaction for interaction sake? Also, do they lead the learners to consider and understand the courses "big ideas?" For that matter, have I even considered what are the "big ideas," those that would lead to enduring understanding?

In some ways, I see the advantage of developing a course from scratch. In revising a course, one needs to decided if the designer was following a backward design approach. In my case, the I know the original designer did start the design process with end in mind. My challenge then is to redesign the course to meet the needs of the online learner and maintain the integrity of the course. Definitely not easy!

Excitement in Technology

My current attempt to introduce synchronous online learning at work (my ARP) continues to surprise me. Why? I am intrigued how people have shown such an interest in a new and untried instructional approach (new, at least, for my organization). Of course, not all credit can be given to the technology alone. After all, I am using content from an existing, and very popular technical class. But, I do think the sudden interest is partly due to the appeal of "online" learning.

So what does this all mean? People are hungry for training that is new and exciting. As my Madre said so well, " Learning needs to be engaging." The 13 quick sign-up I received this week (with virtually no advertising) affirms what people are looking for. So they are attracted to both the technology and the topic. The next objective, as I see it, is to develop a curriculum that engages the learner. Technology will help achieve this goal. But the approach must also be learner centered, interactive, and practical. Hopefully, this will all lead to the real learning that my clients are looking for.