Week 6 - Prep of ID and Podcasts

I read chapter 7 - Developing Design Expertise and thought that it was the message that I have been waiting to read in this course. Fortney clearly makes the case that there needs to be better development of Instructional Designers in the educational programs, which I can agree with 100%. What is interesting, though, is that I happen to feel that I fall more on the creative side of ID with the desire to question, find creative ways to engage, and looking at problems and solutions in more than one light. What I'm learning in this program is that there are actually models and systems and "rules" to follow as an Instructional Designer. While that may be the foundational knowledge necessary, it's certainly important that instructional designers have the ability to create and solve in the real world. I particularly liked Fortney's explanation of Norman's three levels of design: visceral level, behavioral level, and reflective level. Design that appeals to both our rational and emotional selves. I think this speaks to the root of why I desire to further my ID education. I am passionate about exciting and engaging training, and development in the workplace. I also appreciate the response from Boling clarifying that there have been significant advances in the education programs for instructional design. While the programs are expanding, there is still an opportunity for existing ID practitioners to get more involved.

Since Elizabeth Boling authored the response to Fortney's chapter, I thought it'd be fitting to read Boling's chapter 10 - Teaching the Complex Performance of Instructional Design. A reoccurring theme in these chapters is how instructional design cannot be taught in one standard approach of models, theory, and data because it limits the student's ability to tap into how to approach real-world problems and solutions. There has to be a way to bridge the gap between the standard methods of instruction and teaching students to be "prepared-for-action, not guided-to-action" (Stolterman, 2008).

I chose to create a podcast this week instead of finding one to listen to. I have a hard time staying focused long enough to listen to the podcasts so I did a short, 5-minute first episode of my podcast, HR Advocate. I am an HR Business Business Partner and like to share with others some of the challenges I face in the workplace.

Week 5 - Online Collaboration

As we progress in this course and I go through some of the readings, I'm beginning to wonder if I'm truly in the right field. I reach chapter 2 - Toward Understanding the Nature of Design and I truly struggled with just trying to understand what the author was talking about. I get that the author was making the case that ID is a very complex practice, but I think it was the theory that was losing me. One of the redeeming sentences though was Bannon suggesting that we further understand how designers actually derive solutions creatively rather than focusing on models and algorithmic solutions. Bannon also shared some excerpts from Gero, et al.'s (2014) research that I believe may have been more simplistic and easier to follow. Perhaps, much like Gibbons's response notes, I was hoping for more focus on finding the "true nature" of design that Bannon had prefaced for the entire piece.

On the flip side, I was able to engage more in reading chapter 4 - Design Beyond Content because of the focus on developing content that the learner can retain. The content alone is not enough, it's in the design, delivery, methodology, etc. that create the entire learning experience. The key point that stuck with me was the idea that learning the content isn't enough. It's when the learner goes beyond the content to seek more, learn more, understand more, building "deep learners". Would you rather teach a child a set of facts, or how to be creative, etc. to develop skills AND character traits. What a novel concept?! Develop a learner, not a robot who can memorize content.

I will admit, my faith in ID as a field of study was heavily questioned after reading chapter 2. However, faith restored after reading chapter 4! The supplement activities that we've been doing also feel like I'm doing what I should be doing. The activities are simple, but useful, and have a practical purpose in my life. For example, this week's assignment to generate a Google doc and collaborate is something I do on a daily basis for work. In this example, I generated a promotion memo for another employee and had her review and sign. I played around with some of the add-ons and downloaded Docu-Sign. I've included both the original here and the fully executed, signed version here.

I am looking forward to learning more about the functional design activities, maybe less theory for me personally.