Module 7: Teaching (Part 1)

(Instructional 'Design' Theories)

Comparisons of Theories | Unit-Module-Topic Outline | Strategic Activities

Preface

The infamous "Green Book"* (I am told) is considered by many to be a good source of information on instructional-design theories and models. On page 12 it states "To understand what instructionaldesign theory is, it is helpful to contrast it with what it is not. It differs in important ways from learning theory [such as Robert Gagne], instructional-design process [such as ADDIE, or Dick & Carey] , and curriculum theory." This volume essentially devotes one chapter per theory, and the book has 27 chapters [21 theories covered], but does not make a single mention of ADDIE or Gagne, and only in two sentences mentions Dick & Carey in the context of formative assessment.

In the first chapter of this large (715 pages) volume II, Reigeluth delineats instructional-design theory from descriptive theories such as learning theories. Rather than the typical scientific objectivism of narrow cause-and-effect descriptions and the concerns with validity, design-theory (according to Reigeluth) is prescriptive, is more concerned with preferability, and incorporates values and practical goals. Although not overly restrictive, design theories should include explicit guidance by specifying methods and subcomponents of those methods, but also in specifying the situations where they apply.

Dr. Michael Molenda (as much an originator, or populizer of what he calls the "colloquial" term ADDIE as any other) of Indiana University has written a history of the ADDIE model, for inclusion in: A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson, Ed's, Educational Technology: An Encyclopedia. Copyright by ABC-Clio, Santa Barbara, CA, 2003. This article can be found at: http://www.indiana.edu/~molpage/The%20ADDIE%20Model_Encyclo.pdf

Although few would dispute the importance of delineating learning theories, from practical instructional models in the real world (realistic and in practice), I personally can't determine how much value rests in differentiating between ISD, ID, and other 'processes' which Reigeluth states are for planning and preparing instruction, and what Reigeluth includes in the 'Green Book' as bonified design theories which describe the methods of instruction. In addition, the instructions for this assignment do not seem to make such a distinction either. For the purpose of this assignment therefor, I will not differentiate them.

Perhaps an older delineation of theories from other sciences, is the distinction between normative and positive theories. There are of course educational discourses which use derivatives, or mix and match from this older taxonomy. For instance, Peter Lisle (1997, here: http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/peterdl/ID%20Theory.htm) makes the below distinction, citing other sources:

• Positivist approaches have the role of determining laws of cause and effect.
• Interpretative approaches attempt to uncover the choices involved in human action.
• Critical approaches analyse the ways in which social structure constrain and direct human action.

Martin Ryder's very popular resources page, found at: http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html breaks ID theories down into (1) Modern Prescriptive (which includes Behaviorist derived theories, prescribed methodologies, and cognitivist models) and (2) Postmodern Phenomenological Models (which includes constructivist approaches). Unfortunately, his page does not include a detailed justification for this schema.

Yet another classification system with similarity to Ryder's (has the same basic separation), but with radically different descriptions and included theories within each category is that proposed by Kenneth J. Smith (1998) here http://www.ic.arizona.edu/ic/edp511/isd1.html;

"two broad fields of instructional design theory are directed instruction (instructional systems) and constructivist. Directed instruction approaches are, in general, drawn from behaviorist learning theory, while constructivist approaches are drawn from cognitivist learning theory."

Essentially then, it seems that Smith (1998) is attempting to break up design theories into categories based on the type of learning theory they derive from and draw most heavily upon. After searching yet more on the internet, it appears that this is one of the most popular ways of taxonimizing instructional design theories and models, of those methods accessible via or published on the internet. For a more obvious case of this, see Dabbagh (2007)** here: http://classweb.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/IDKB/models_theories.htm

* The 'Green Book' refers to Reigeluth (ed.) (1999).Instructional-design theories and models. V.II  Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

** Dabbagh, N. (2007). The Instructional Design Knowledge Base. Retrieved month, day, year from Nada Dabbagh's Homepage, George Mason University, Instructional Technology Program. Website: http://classweb.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/IDKB/index.htm

Comparisons of Theories

Intro to Elaboration Theory | Intro to Self-Science Theory | Comparisons | Back to Top

Description and steps ELABORATION THEORY (Reigeluth, 1999)

OVERVIEW: "According to elaboration theory, instruction should be organized in increasing order of complexity for optimal learning. For example, when teaching a procedural task, the simplest version of the task is presented first; subsequent lessons present additional versions until the full range of tasks are taught. In each lesson, the learner should be reminded of all versions taught so far (summary/synthesis). A key idea of elaboration theory is that the learner needs to develop a meaningful context into which subsequent ideas and skills can be assimilated" (Kearsley, 2007).

The below material is from the Edu-Tech Wiki here: http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Elaboration_theory

Concept Map

.Further Resources on Elaboration Theory:

1. http://tip.psychology.org/reigelut.html
2. http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/elab.html
3. * Concept Map from: http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/h/x/hxk208/INSYS525/Elaboration%20Theory.jpg

Intro to Elaboration Theory | Intro to Self-Science Theory | Comparisons | Back to Top

Description and steps SELF-SCIENCE (Stone-McCown & McCormick, 1999)

OVERVIEW: ."The primary goal of this theory is to foster children's emotional development. At a more detailed level, goals include: (1) legitimizing self-knowledge as valuable subject matter, (2) developing a trusting attitude toward members of one's class, (3) becoming more aware of the multiple and layered feelings one has, {4} developing communication stills for affective states, (5) disclosing one's thoughts and feelings, (6) enhancing self-estefm, (7) ac-cepting responsibility for one's attitudes and actions, (8) becoming aware of one's major concerns/worries/anxieties, (9) recognizing one's present behavioral patterns and learning styles, and (10) experimenting with alternative behavioral patterns, such as choosing optimism and hope. This theory was developed for a school with grades 1-8 and requires support from the administration, teachers, and parents for a Self-Science course to succeed" (Stone-McCown & McCormick, 1999)	Ann Hathaway McCormick	Karen Stone-McCown
	Photos taken from Google here.

Theoretical Roots (quoted from: http://www.unco.edu/cebs/psychology/kevinpugh/5-7320/ITcomponents/eq.html): 

• Carl Jung-unconscious processes, archetypes, and the "self"
• Jean Piaget-developmental stages and learning processes
• Abraham Maslow-hierarchical needs and self-actualization
• Eric Ericson-drive for identify and the tasks of children at various stages such as, trust v. mistrust, identity v. role confusion.

Methods/Steps: The major method of this theory is the "Trumpet Process," which includes the following steps for students to take (quoted here from Stone-McCown & McCormick, 1999):

1. Share experiences, to provide a common reference point for discussion.
2. Inventory your responses: what did you think, feet, and do?
3. Recognize your patterns of unique behavior.
4. Own your patterns and understand how each serves you.
5. Consider the consequences of each pattern (benefits and costs).
6. Allow alternative patterns—explore the options.
7. Evaluate the altentatives.
8. Choose rhe tiest one for each situation.

Concept Map

 

Additional Resources on Self-Science:

1. http://www.unco.edu/cebs/psychology/kevinpugh/5-7320/ITcomponents/eq.html
2. http://www.self-science.com/
3. http://www.6seconds.org/school/self-science.php

Intro to Elaboration Theory | Intro to Self-Science Theory | Comparisons | Back to Top

Similarities and Differences

One aspect or result of categorizing instructional design processes/theories/models with a criteria for being prescriptive is that it makes explicit the idea that they contain inherant values of desirability. Likewise, because desirability is often defined by such legal ambiguities as "the sound judgement of an average person" and other so-called 'averages' which reflect the contextualized society as a whole, we might easily decide upon values-implied/expressed as a means to compare these ID models and theories.

Below is a table of the various components of affective value as they relate to instructional design objectives. It is reproduced here (typed by myself) in entirety exactly as it appears in the introductory chapter to Unit 4 "Fostering Affective Development" of Reigeluth (1999), which is a major section of the 'Green Book Vol.II' and which is devoted exclusivel to affective theories:

It might be possible to argue that in some respects, there is overlap in the values and goals that all ID theories/models have. However, many people would argue that the above values correspond to higher tiers on such models as the Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development and of course Maslow's Hiearchy of Needs

Whereas Piaget would argue that you cannot rush a child past their current operational stage of thinking cognitively, most parents will still acknowledge the importance of aiming the arrow straight early on, so that when they are older they will not surely depart from it (the path).

I beleive that cognitive theories such as elaboration theory are important, because they seem to be closer to the lower level processes which actually occur in our minds, and to be supportable by strong evidence (or refutable). On the other hand, it is also important to work out methods whereby we can teach and instill some moral conscience or ethical reasoning skills within our children, without having to resort to the Church-run State that is still present in parts of the world (because I most political science scholars would argue that system is not in the best interest of the State, and most wester theologians would agree).

Comparison of Weaknesses

At first glance, the obvious weaknesses of an instructional system which specifies the methods and principles of helping students discover and develop their own inner self --- one with a strong sense of ethics, and of moral imperative are:

1. How to assess success & failure
2. How to measure the theoretical validity
3. Legal problems resulting if public instititutions should attempt to incorporate these methods
4. Additional complexity added to an already bewildering debate over curricular inclusion

The weakness of elaboration theory on the other hand, can be quite formidable as well, and likely include such factors as:

1. Having worked as a teacher, and particularly for a small college with a very high class load for new instructors (who often must design all their own curriculum), the great detail this theory prescribes, will not often be implemented.
2. Lack of implementation notwithstanding, if a school administrator or program coordinator does decide this model should be incorporated, instructors will likely need extensive training in order to implement Elaboration Theory or just SCM.
3. Because of the additional drain on human and other resources, attention to such non-academic areas as emotional, social, and intra-personal communications will often be overlooked.

Comparison of Strengths

One strength of the Self-Science theory is that this system approaches student learners, from the perspective of the whole person. Although there would be a great need to avoid partisan politics or orientation which is exclusionary toward the major world religions (some minor religious or cult groups will inevitably not receive equal standing, as is the case with our entire legal system) -- on the other hand, I think that such programs have great potential.

At the very least, this area deserves more attention in the research literature. Whereas many might assume that subjective domains of exploratory investigation are not likely to remain amenable to publishable study, Martin and Reigeluth (1999) actually proposes a model p. 498 which introduces the design issues:

In some respects, it might be said that the Self-Science approach is more general, and inclusive of the larger view. However, it can also be said that this is a strength of the elaboration theory. In fact, you could easily use the SCM method to organizae your lesson content, when implementing the self-science model. In that regard, SCM and elaboration theory as a whole are quite flexible and adaptable to a wide range of situations and contexts.

Not only are the component submethods specificied for theoretical, conceptual and procedural content, but these methods can be mixed and matched, such as when parallel organization of content is necessary for a theory into practice course.

Personal Reactions/Preferences

Here I would like to quote Martin and Reigeluth (1999), because my opinion is so very much encapsulated in this:

"In pondering the question "why consider affect?," we became even more convinced that the affective domain is vitally important in all aspects of learning and that the affective programs can have at least some positive influence on the lives of students of all ages as they grow and develop. We beleive there are compelling reasons for including affective development in all types of learning environments. The include instructional sequences or programs for young students and older students, in corporate training, medical education, graduate education, and community education programs, to name a few." (p. 507)

I am really pleased personally when I come across an elegant, simple, and easily implemented design theory, which appears to be directly the result of learning theory. My personal hope is that one day, the gaps between brain science, sciences of the mind, and actual educational practice all be closed, much the same way that in the last century, chemistry and physics have become one long continum, and much the way that genetics closed the gap between fossil archeology and classical phylogeny.

On the other hand, it seems that we as a democracy are rapidly dissentigrating culturally into a mire of cynicism, dishonesty, and self-centeredness. The dividing line between the neanderthalic masses, and the enlightened few was a guiding light in the dark in ages past. But the internet is placing the massive power of knowledge into the hands of the masses, without the usual mentorship and training in accountability, stewardship, and duty as was the case for ages past, within the hallowed halls of Universities and Churches. Like the French revolution, everything is up for grabs, for reconsideration, and for TESTING for worthiness as a new doctrine, for a new generation, and new morality. It's absolute choas.

We need an anchor in this storm, and a good compass to help us see past the night. I am of the opinion that we can find it by searching ourselves, our hearts, and by exercising our minds. But a conscience does not develop on its own. It needs to be watered and tended by a good gardener. We as instructional designers cannot continue to ignore these issues, because in many respects, we have become the new speech writers and ministers for the next generation of children. Once you start preaching the message, it places a higher burden on you to also walk the talk.

References

Kearsley, Greg (2007). Theory Into Practice Database, at: http://tip.psychology.org/reigelut.html

Kim,Heeyoung. (2002) Concept Map Found at: http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/h/x/hxk208/INSYS525/K_base1.htm on Dec. 9, 2007.

Martin, B. L., and Reigeluth, C. M. (1999) Affective Education and the Affective Domain: Implications for Instructional-Design Theories and Models. . In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. (Volume II). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. (Volume II). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

Stone-McCown, K., & McCormick, A. H. (1999). Self-science: Emotional intelligence for children. In Reigeluth (ed.) .Instructional-design theories and models. V.II  Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Intro to Elaboration Theory | Intro to Self-Science Theory | Comparisons | Back to Top

Unit-Module-Topic Outline

TOPIC: Introduction to HTML Programming in Dreamweaver

Unit 1 Programming Languages & HTML History

Unit 2 Dreamweaver in Macromedia Studio 8, and Adobe CS3

Unit 3 HTML Syntax, Grammar, and Conventions

Module 3.1 Introduction & Definitions

Module 3.2 Elements Tags

Module 3.3 Formatting

Module 3.4 Entities

Module 3.5 Links

Module 3.6 Tables and Forms

Module 3.7 Frames

Module 3.8 Background & Colors

Module 3.9 Images

Module 3.10 Advanced Topics

Topic 3.10.a Layouts & Fonts

Topic 3.10.b Head & Meta

Topic 3.10.c Scripts & Events

Topic 3.10.d CSS

 

~back to top~

Strategic Activities

1. I would have students create pictoral models of how a website URL relates to an IP address on the internet
2. diagrammatically demonstrate the process of browser request for a file, to DNS, to webserver, to file system, to file
3. Let students setup test pages on a testing server in a lab, have them create working examples of all objects learned
4. Let students pick various websites on the internet, then view the source code and dissect them for understanding
5. Create organizers and tables, which display the function, syntax, rules for usage, and browser versions which support various objects in the HTML code language.

~back to top~