A Summary of the Flight Path
My Flight Path for ETEC 524 took a practical focus as my initial review of the course content suggested we would be taking a closer look at concrete instructional design through the practice of applying the ideas and elements presented in our own units of learning. Within my Flight Path I identified specific goals: First, I was interested in learning about new and different technological tools. There are a handful of digital apps I have tested and explored throughout the MET program, but the Pot of Gold section provided in this course indicated that we would be taking a closer look at what tools are available, and how we may integrate them into our respective teaching environments. Next, I wanted to gain a deeper understanding of what ‘good design’ in learning management systems looks like. I have a strong design sense and an interest in aesthetics, but I often question how to meaningfully apply this to learning environments. Additionally, I have discovered various technological tools, inspiring web-based applications and engaging pedagogical practices, but have struggled to find ways to implement them effectively in my position of educator at a provincial government office. For this reason, one of my goals was to consider how to directly connect my learning with my work, and identify whether there are any technologies or practices I could advocate for in my workplace. Finally, I expressed a desire to further explore active engagement and community building in digital spaces, an interest that I have carried with me throughout the MET program. This concept is in line with one of the First Peoples Principles of learning, “learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place)” (FNESC, 2015). I expressed wanting to continue to develop community within my workplace’s online environment, and that perhaps I would identify new tools and practices to do so within this course.
Overall Course Experience
The following reflection on my experience in ETEC 524 looks at each the goals outlined in the initial Flight Path and details how they were addressed in ways both planned and unexpected.
New and Different Tools
In my initial overview of ETEC 524 I spied the Pot of Gold, which is a growing collection of tools, apps, articles, and other ed-tech-related resources for students to explore. Throughout the course there were various opportunities for students to share resources and their benefits (or pitfalls) based on direct experience. I did not have anything to share in the activity for sharing Assessment Elements in Part 1 of Module 2 – however this meant that the resources provided by my peers were especially useful for me. I was able to participate in the activity for sharing Instructional Communication Tools in Part 2 of Module 2, and benefited from reading about the tools that others were able share. Most importantly, ETEC 524 provide me the opportunity to experiment with the learning management system (LMS), Moodle for my design of a unit of learning. As my workplace is in the process of implementing Moodle as our new LMS, the opportunity to explore, create and design within the system was directly applicable to my future work.
Good Design in Learning Environments
The concept of ‘good design,’ both in terms of how learning is structured pedagogically, as well as the format and presentation of content was addressed repeatedly and in different ways throughout ETEC 524. There were key readings that I found particularly valuable in that they offered clear examples for putting good design into practice. Bai’s (2019) article details various pedagogical practices such as situated learning, a methodology that supports learners by “providing learning opportunities in authentic contexts and engaging students in authentic activities” (p. 612). Bai also outlines inquiry-based learning, “…a process of discovering new causal relations, with the learner formulating hypotheses and testing them by conducting experiments and/or making observations,” and explains, that with inquiry-based learning, “…the learners need to be self-directed and actively participate in the pursuit and discovery of new knowledge through exploration, observation and investigation” (p. 614). Bai’s article helped me to formulate the structure of my unit of learning – I aimed to incorporate situated learning, by designing activities that guided learners to create their own tools to use in their work, rather than to participate in learning activities that are not useful beyond the scope of learning. I employed inquiry-based learning, by incorporating research and personal discovery into the unit of learning, with the intent of developing the senses of autonomy and agency in learners.
Devers, Devers and Oke’s (2018) chapter on metacognition, and Tobin’s (2014) article regarding Universal Design for Learning (UDL) provide explicit direction on ways that instructional designers can create accessible and engaging content. Devers et al. (2018), suggest that “…learning improves when words and pictures are highlighted” (p. 12) and “learning increases when a human voice is used instead of a computer voice” (p.14). I know from personal experience how monotonous self-directed learning can be, so I incorporated these elements into my design to present complex information in a more manageable way. Tobin (2014) writes about breaking down learning into smaller, digestible pieces, explaining that “the result is a continuous whole that can be experienced a little bit at a time, repeated for reinforcement and study or even experienced from multiple starting points and self-selected paths through the materials” (p. 18). This perspective inspired me reconsider my standard approach of attempting to teach a whole topic in one 2–3-hour synchronous learning event, and instead break-down learning into several smaller activities over a longer period. I will be keeping both of these articles on hand to inform my instructional design practice moving forward.
Technologies or Practices to Advocate For
The experience I have gained working with Moodle in this course has allowed me to feel confident to advocate for obtaining design permissions within my workplace’s new LMS to be able to start building a learning environment specifically for my department, a role that is usually reserved for corporate-focused rather than divisional positions.
Unexpectedly, the most notable practice I identified as one to advocate for in my workplace, is the incorporation of regular assessment strategies. I often avoid assessment, as that type of critique usually comes from the learners’ direct supervisors, and my role is not supervisory. However, Anderson (2008) describes a formative assessment style, “that serves to motivate, inform, and provide feedback to both learners and teachers” (p. 49). Inspired by this perspective, I chose to incorporate an informal style of assessment in my unit of learning, designed to be self-reflective yet also allow for constructive feedback through collaborative discussion. Devers et al. (2018) assert that “self-explanation is another technique that encourages students to evaluate, connect, and self-correct their knowledge,” and that “a key component of self-explanation is combining new information with old information” (pp. 17-18). My goal is to lead and mentor staff so that they can develop their own unique methods of working, and be independent, agentic, and self-motivated employees, and I believe this style of formative assessment using self-explanation and group critique can help them to be aware of and take control of their personal development.
Building a Community
The notion of student-lead learning, or teacher as facilitator rather than as an authority is a prevalent theme in modern educational theory, yet I still struggle with falling back into the boring and expected role of lecturer. Burnett (2016) states that, “…knowledge is not fixed, but evolves as individuals improvise together – in practice – with what is available and what counts” (p. 568), and I want my personal pedagogy to reflect this sentiment; I want to create a learning environment (digitally, physically and conceptually) that celebrates learning through collaboration and social interaction, since as Dumont (2010) asserts, “we learn through social interaction” (p. 6). The practice of designing a unit of learning in this course has allowed me to design intentionally with a social-collaborative model of learning in mind. Throughout this course, I realized that to create a digital learning environment that supports collaboration through asynchronous activity is only one element to consider, but by also incorporating this perspective into the synchronous elements of a hybrid learning model allows for a cohesive environment of learning that supports an ongoing development of a community of practice.
Next Steps
Throughout this reflection I have identified the new design practices and pedagogical perspectives I have incorporated within the unit of learning I created and provided potential future implications for each. In this course, I chose to design a unit of learning that was directly applicable to my work, and I have already begun adapting it for use in my workplace. Additionally, my experience in this course has motivated me to focus on developing the educational content in my workplace to reflect ‘good design’ aesthetically, technologically, and pedagogically. My immediate future goals are as follows:
- Use Moodle to design a whole course of learning that include lesson plans that incorporate a collaborative learning methodology and intentionally remove focus from the instructor-led lecture format to re-focus the learning on situated and inquiry-based activities;
- Incorporate formative assessment into lessons plans through self-explanation and informal and constructive group critique; and,
- Create accessible and interactive learning content that is cognisant of UDL and metacognition principles.
My initial impression that this course would provide practical guidance to support instructional design was correct, yet unexpectedly, this course has also allowed me to reconsider the overall design of learning in my workplace and has afforded me with the necessary tools to be able to initiate a much needed informed and meaningful re-design.
References
Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 45-74). Edmonton AB: Athabasca University. Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf
Bai, H. (2019). Pedagogical practices of mobile learning in K-12 and higher education settings. TechTrends, 63, 611–620.
Burnett, C. (2016) Being together in classrooms at the interface of the physical and virtual: Implications for collaboration in on/off-screen sites. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(4), 566-589.
Devers, J. C., Devers, E. E., & Oke, L. D. (2018). Encouraging metacognition in digital learning environments. In D. Ifenthaler (Ed.), Digital workplace learning: Bridging formal and informal learning with digital technologies (pp. 9-22). Springer International Publishing AG. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-46215-8
Dumont, H., Istance, D., & Benavides, F. (Eds.). (2010). The nature of learning: Using research to Inspire practice. OECD Publications: Paris, France. http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/50300814.pdf
FNESC (2015). The First Peoples principles of learning. Retrieved from https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/kindergarten-to-grade-12/teach/teaching-tools/aboriginal-education/principles_of_learning.pdf
Tobin, T. J. (2014). Increase online student retention with universal design for learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 15(3), 13-24.