Talk:Instructional Design

From Wikiversity
(Redirected from Talk:Instructional design)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to our instructional design camp. We hope you enjoy it.

This course is based around a core created by Peter Honebein and students at Indiana University Bloomington. Groups from other universities, as well as other researchers and experts, are welcome to add modules to this page.

Above comment originally from the project home page, moved here to extend discussion. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

This topic was started as a class activity for the Indiana University Spring 2007 R626 course (Designing Instructional Strategies). Phonebein 22:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


____________________

Collaborative Authors[edit source]

  • Please put your signature here by clicking "edit this page" & then by clicking the button just to the right of the W with the red circle and line through it (look up above).File:Signature b.jpg
  • We can eventually compile a list of our class with links to personal Wiki homepages.

--Lkirkner 21:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

--Jennifer 00:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

--Jamesfneal 13:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

--Cambrass 16:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

--Phonebein 19:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

--Kaholden 19:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

--Lzinsmei 20:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

--Melissa 23:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)



____________________

As Ray noted in the General Discussion, a couple of organization structures have been proposed. I will repost mine here for group discussion. Edit away!

I agree that we should keep a unified approach across teams. Here is how things fit together in my mind. It appears to me that each team's efforts contribute to a overall "lesson" entitled "Micro-level Instructional Methods" (at least that is the working title on the wiki on this page at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Topic:Instructional_Design ). Each team is responsible for preparing what I view as a "module" within the "lesson". Therefore, it makes sense to me that each "module" within the "lesson" would have the same look and feel.

This is my take on the wiki hierarchy:

 * Topic Level: Instructional Design
 * 1st Sub level: Instructional Tactics and Strategies -  Wiki breadcrumb being Instructional Design > Instructional Tactics and Strategies.
 * 2nd Sub level: Micro-level Instructional Methods - I view this as the overall "Lesson" level with regard to our collective project for R626.  
 * 3rd Sub level: The "Modules" created by each project team form the"Lesson" and are based on instructional methods for each domain type, including:
     - Affective Domain Module: [Instructional Design > Instructional Tactics and Strategies > Micro-level Instructional Methods > Affective Behaviors]
     - Cognitive Domain Module: [Instructional Design > Instructional Tactics and Strategies > Micro-level Instructional Methods > Cognitive Behaviors]
     - Psychomotor Domain Module: [Instructional Design > Instructional Tactics and Strategies > Micro-level Instructional Methods > Psychomotor Behaviors]
     - Interpersonal Domain Module: [Instructional Design > Instructional Tactics and Strategies > Micro-level Instructional Methods > Interpersonal Behaviors]

Is this how others view it? Jennifer 18:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

__________________

Author: Laurie A Kirkner (reposted here by Jennifer 18:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC) ) Posted: 2/18/2007 1:34:49 PM Subject: Our Audience & Who...Toward What...With-What-End

Audience: • Distance students • Adults, bachelor-degreed • At some introductory point in the IST masters/PhD process, i.e. basic foundational knowledge of the field, though maybe not much in affective-domain • Highly motivated • Independent • Want to craft their own way

Goal (the Who Toward-What With-What-End): Instructional Design graduate students will acquire enough knowledge of the background/research of the affective domain, such that they can apply affective concepts/models to the design of (a) affective learning (b) cognitive/psychomotor learning. (Learners need to be able to begin applying to other models/theories.)

What now?[edit source]

I am not clear where we are in the decision making process. It seems like we have decided on an overall structure for our main page, with links to each of our domain pages. (see Jennifer's bread crumb trails above.) Other to-do's:

  1. Micro-level instructional conditions page. Someone else suggested that we have overarching lesson (or module) on Micro-level instructional methods. That sounds like a good idea. A page has already been created. Should we just jump in and start adding/editing content? In the spirit of Wiki, we should search wiki to see if there are other pages already out that are dedicated to this topic.
  2. Common topics for each domain page. I think we have decided that each domain page should have the same commmon topics. Yes? If so, is that one of our next steps? to suggest those topics, in the same way that Jennifer suggested the overall structure?

--Lzinsmei 22:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Ladema

Working outline for each module[edit source]

Here is a slightly altered version of Laurie's outline for each module. Please offer suggestions for improvement over the next week or so and we can shoot for March 1st to move this to our respective pages/modules.

Micro-level instructional methods for *** behaviors

   Contents
 
   Overview
     - Goals
     - Objectives
   Core topics / related topics 
   Strategies & tactics 
   Examples
     - Production (media design) 
     - Online learning
     - Face-to-face 

Learning Resources / Related websites Fundamental theories, models & taxonomies Instructional methods Projects Ask a question Site design discussion area


First, I think our topic is at too high a level. I’d drop it down to Micro-Instructional Strategies.

Next, I guess I’m looking at this a little differently. If I were an instructional designer with a specific instructional problem to solve, then I think I would appreciate a quick way to find a solution to the problem, rather than having to read through an entire course.

Under that scenario, the first thing I would want to provide for the designer would be a way to identify which domain his or her problem fell into. From there, I would provide a link to a list of typical problems or conditions within that domain. Once the designer chose an item from that list that matched, or was similar, to his or her problem, I would provide a list of strategies that might be useful for addressing the selected problem.

So, my hierarchy would look like:

Micro-Instructional Strategies

       Domains
            Problems/Conditions
                   Specific Micro-Strategies

We might need something else at the higher level, but I wouldn’t include any headings that didn’t help get the learner to the Specific Micro-Strategies level quickly. Rdubrayj 00:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Site-Design Discussion Area (Ask a Question)[edit source]

  • I don't know how this all works out, but I thought I would enter my additions/suggestions in colored text (336699), thinking that Pete might finalize the page by returning kept/edited text to black. I'm trying to find a way that, as we all get more active, we can see what's been changed/added. Thoughts? (Thanks, Laurie)
  • Re: "discussions" - there is a discussion tab (see top of each page) for each wiki page where we can propose and discuss ideas prior to posting on the wiki itself. I suggest we conduct the discussions there. Also, I noticed that if you end your sentence with 4 of these symbols (~) in a row, it will name and date stamp your "post". Sound good? Jennifer 18:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I am wondering what if anything, any processes any of the groups may have decided to use to work on their instructional methods. Did anyone come up with a good process, or what they think is good? I think this is a great idea, and I'm testing how it feels by typing here..Deb1207 09:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree we use different colors or font to help identfy our enteries to this discussion. Rea

Related Resources & Websites[edit source]

The book How people learn: brain, mind, experience and school and the associated Wikiversity project of the same name explore the implications of recent research in psychology for learning and teaching.

Vinson, C. (no date). Learning Domains and Delivery of Instruction. Available at [1]

Great start, but stale[edit source]

I think this is a very interesting topic, but it looks like the page has gone stale. Is there anyone still doing anything with this? If not, I might co-opt the page and refresh the content a bit. Historybuff 15:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, we work on this course as a class at Indiana University pretty much every Spring. It is a masters-level course in instructional design - R626. I'm the professor. Intention is to add more lessons each semester I teach the class. Thus, it can go dark between semesters. We're interested to see how it emerges and evolves with not only the participation of the class, but other editors and experts. Phonebein 04:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've now gone through a college level course in course Design, so I will be dropping in and adding a bit here and there. Historybuff 20:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
For reference, it appears Indianan University R626 has changed from "Designing Instructional Strategies" to "Instructional Strategies and Tactics", Link Mbrad 00:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok thank you.

Links to ADDIE articles are both broken[edit source]

Any chance of getting updated links to more info about ADDIE? Chorkizard (discusscontribs) 18:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@Chorkizard: Try the Wikipedia article or search the Internet for ADDIE. There are many alternate sources available. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 00:26, 6 June 2020 (UTC)