R511: Instructional and Performance Technologies Foundations Section Spring 2012

Transcription

1 R511: Instructional and Performance Technologies Foundations Section Spring 2012 Semester: January 9 (Mon) May 4 (Fri) Instructor: Dr. Carol Watson Office Hours: By appointment (Edu 2218 or ) Communications: watsonc@indiana.edu; carolawatson (skype) Teaching Assistant: Clare (Zengguan) Chen: chen22@indiana.edu Course Access: or Course Description This is a foundational course in the Instructional Systems Technology (IST) program and provides an overview of the fields of instructional technology (IT) and human performance technology (HPT); both of which are relatively new (and thus ill- defined) fields of study. Given that many IST students come from other fields, R511 provides an historical perspective and an explanation of how the components of the fields fit together; an introduction to the fields of IT and HPT Includes definitions, theories, histories, trends and issues, and career opportunities. Presentations and discussions will be devoted to broadening your understanding of these fields as they relate to learning in schools and the workplace as well as performance in organizations. Learning Objectives To develop common understandings of the basic vocabulary and underlying principles of the IT and HPT fields. For example: Use basic terms with comprehension and differentiate among IT, HPT, and instructional systems design (ISD) Compare and contrast conceptual definitions and models that have emerged over time Appreciate the values espoused by the fields: access, efficiency, effectiveness, and humaneness, Generate one's own working definitions of IT, HPT, and ISD. To gain a familiarity with major issues in the IT and HPT fields in their historical context. For example: Trace the evolution of major ideas over time and associate key people with these ideas Discuss the contributions of theories of learning (i.e., behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism) to IT and HPT, Identify and discuss trends and issues that affect the fields today. To become oriented to career development and professional development in the fields of IT and HPT. For example: Identify key organizations and their roles in the IT and HPT fields Begin to become involved in professional organizations Become acquainted with performance standards advocated by professional IT and HPT organizations Grapple with ethical challenges that characterize the IT and HPT fields. Textbooks and Resources One of the first things you'll notice is that there is no required textbook for this course (Hurrah!). Over the years we have experimented with different textbooks, including anthologies compiled by the instructors. Now we have electronic pdf files for every reading we want to use in the course, and they are all available in one place, Resources in Oncourse. Selected chapters of several books are used in R511; these selected chapters are available in Oncourse. You may wish to acquire some of these books if you plan to take other IST core courses. 1

2 Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (2008). Educational technology. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Pershing, J. A. (Ed.) (2006). Handbook of human performance technology (3 rd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Lecture Presentations The "lecture" component of the course consists of Flash presentations, which you can play through your browser, and corresponding Mp3 files, which you can play on your computer or audio player featuring Dr. Michael Molenda, IST Associate Professor Emeritus, concerning the field of IT and Dr. James A. Pershing, IST Professor, concerning the field of HPT. Each individual presentation of Dr. Molenda is designed to be between 15 and 20 minutes, while Dr. Pershing s presentations last longer than that. Weekly routine A new week begins each Monday and ends the following Sunday. All deliverables are due on Sunday at 11:55 pm EST in your Oncourse Assignments (unless otherwise noted). Below is a recommended schedule for your weekly participation: Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Readings & Presentations Readings & Presentations Readings & Presentations Readings, Presentations, Discussion Discussion Discussion End of discussions. Due date for deliverables Forum Discussions Discussions serve as a tool to explore issues related to the readings. Interacting and discussing issues with others will broaden your understanding of the topics as well as enable you to gain valuable insights from your classmates. Weekly discussions are reviewed and graded. Each discussion counts as a possible 10 points toward the final grade and are based upon the discussion criteria shown below. Discussions are listed by week under the Forum link in Oncourse. When posting, please summarize your understanding of the week's readings and then pose at least one significant question to the class (this should be done by Thursday each week). You should check back at least twice during the week to respond to your classmates' questions. The instructor will also respond (though may not respond to every student every week). Note: There is no Discussion the week of a group assignment (week 6 and weeks 15-17) or during Spring Break (week 11). When engaging in discussion, whether in class or online, it's important to maintain a sense of freedom to express our thoughts while at the same time providing a safe atmosphere for diverse opinions and expressions. Please keep this in mind as you are communicating with others. All participants in a discussion should maintain a professional attitude and manner of discussion. While spirited debate is encouraged, unprofessional behavior is not. Please keep in mind that words often come across "more directly and harshly" in this written form of communication, since there are no facial gestures, expression, or tone of voice to help convey your message fully. In your discussion posts, feel free to use emoticons such as :- ) or ;- ) to help others understand humor or laughter, and be considerate of others' perspectives. Discussion Grading Criteria There is always a debate about discussions in online classrooms and I am sympathetic to both sides. I have taken many online courses, and taught more. Basically, when the instructor leads the discussion, student comments are predictable. So, here is your chance to ask questions; take the discussion where you would like it to go. And based on student feedback and reflection papers, this ends up being a valuable part of the class. On the other hand, it can feel forced, since part of the 2

3 grade is posting on time and replying to peers. And to some extent, it is. However, I hope that our discussions can be robust and interesting! Grades are based on both quantity and quality of posts and are worth up to 10 points each. Level 1: simply agreeing with what another person has posted. Level 2: comments based on solely prior experience (although this can be valuable). Level 3: reporting the results of some type of research or attaching a link to a new research article. Level 4: building on other's contributions by asking questions that extend the discussion. Level 5: synthesizing the content and providing an overall response to the question. Criteria Excellent Good Adequate Poor Level of Participation Mostly level 3, 4, & 5 Some level 2, 3, & 4 Some level 2 & 3 Mostly level 1 & 2 Demonstration demonstrates excellent and articulation knowledge of course of course content based on readings knowledge and lectures. Articulates, critically evaluates, and advances key issues in the field Critical analysis of issues Support of learning for others critically analyzes relevant issues and summarizes key issues demonstrating an advanced level of expertise often interacts with and supports learning of others by asking questions, providing resources or supporting the learning of others demonstrates good knowledge of course content and is able to fairly well articulate and critically evaluate key issues in the field critically analyzes relevant issues and summarizes key issues demonstrating a good level of expertise sometimes interacts with and supports learning of others by providing resources or support for their learning demonstrates only fair knowledge of course content and articulates and critically evaluates key issues in the field only at a surface level critically analyzes relevant issues and summarizes key issues demonstrating a fair level of expertise rarely interacts with and supports learning of others by providing resources or support for their learning does not demonstrate knowledge of course content and does not articulate or critically evaluate key issues in the field critically analyzes relevant issues and summarizes key issues demonstrating a novice level of expertise never supports learning of others by providing resources or support for their learning Assignments Grading Criteria There are 6 assignments during this semester, in addition to the weekly discussion forums. Four are individual assignments (Letter to the Professor, Trends and Issues, Diagram the Field, and a Reflection paper) and two are team assignments (Learning Theory Matrix and HPT Case Analysis). Grades for the team assignments are composed of two parts; the instructor grade and points that are assigned by team members. The Peer Evaluation form can be downloaded from the Resources link in Oncourse and is due 3 days following each group project. Each assignment is due on the date indicated, by midnight (11:55 pm), Eastern Time. Please save your assignments as "Deliverable_FirstnameLast Initial" (e.g., Letter_JohnS, or Trends_SusieM) and upload to the Oncourse Assignments by midnight Sunday (except the Reflection paper which is due on a Thursday). 10% will be deducted from late assignments. All assignments should follow APA format. If you are not familiar with this, there are many sites you can view, but some of the easiest are (for your reference list only) style- help.aspx (the site for the actual APA manual). 3

4 You might also wish to purchase an actual book (available at Amazon, of course) at alias%3dstripbooks&field- keywords=apa+style+manual&sprefix=apa+style. It is a great reference book to have on hand! Topic Letter to the Professor (individual) Creating a learning theories matrix and explanation guide (group) Issues in IT (individual) Diagramming the fields of IT and HPT (individual) Case Analysis for the HPT field (group) Reflections on lessons learned and future plans (individual) Discussion Forums (11 as scheduled; plus Introduction) Total Points 45 possible 65 possible 50 possible 50 possible 65 possible 45 possible 120 possible 440 possible A word about Teams The IST program puts a heavy emphasis on learning to work in teams. The primary reason for this is that most of the professional work in the IT and HPT fields is done collaboratively. For example, instructional designers in corporate settings usually work in teams, including at least a subject- matter expert and a media production specialist in addition to the designer. Working collaboratively can be more difficult at a distance than it is in a face- to- face class, both for logistical reasons and for psychological reasons. It's more difficult to hold a discussion when we can't see each other's body language and facial expressions. For this reason, students are formed into smaller teams of two to four members. Team assignments will be made during Week 2 and will remain the same for both team projects. Each team project will be graded by the instructor as well as by an individual s team members (using the peer assessment form in Oncourse). The best team experiences are those where each person contributes to the outcome. Teamwork can be done in Oncourse (using wikis), or online using a tool such as skype, or Google Docs. There are also many free wiki services such as wikispaces.com where your group can set up its own wiki. The instructor can also arrange for an Adobe Connect (formerly Breeze) meeting space for your team. The choice is yours. Course Grading Guidelines The following grading policy has been adopted for graduate courses in the School of Education ( The percentages in parentheses and the point distributions were added by the instructor. A (96-100%) pts = Outstanding achievement. Unusually complete command of the course content. A- (90-95%) pts = Excellent achievement. Very thorough command of course content. B+ (86-89%) pts = Very good achievement. Thorough command of course material. B (83-85%) pts = Good achievement. Solid, acceptable performance. B- (80-82%) pts = Fair achievement. Acceptable performance. C+ (77-79%) pts = Not wholly satisfactory achievement. Marginal performance on the requirements. 4

5 C (73-76%) = Marginal achievement. Minimally acceptable performance on course assignments. = Courses with a grade lower than a C may not be counted in graduate programs. Plagiarism and Original Work It is expected that you will turn in original work (your own or that of your team) for every part of every deliverable in this course. We also expect that you make every effort to acquaint yourself with both the IU Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities and Conduct, the concept of plagiarism (start with the required departmental tutorial "Understanding Plagiarism"), and the ways in which you must both credit the work of others and avoid presenting that work as your own (start with the resources from the Campus Writing Program and reference the APA style guide). Team project work containing plagiarized material will be awarded a grade of F. At the discretion of the instructor, the project may be turned back to the team for correction of the problem before a specified deadline and re- graded for a grade equivalent to or lower than the grade the project would have otherwise received. If your individual work is discovered to be plagiarized or to contain plagiarized material, you will receive a failing grade for the course. These policies cover written and graphical work, and all work assigned in the course. Course overview: (Links to the readings, presentations and individual assignments can be found on the class website: The individual PDFs of the readings can also be found under the Resources link in the Oncourse class site.) Dates Topics Readings (Required in italics) Deliverables 1 Introductions None this week Letter to Professor 1/9-1/15 2 IT Overview 1. Januszewski, A., & Persichitte, K. A. (2008) 1/16-1/22 2. Reiser, R. A. (2007) 3. Klein, J. D., Brinkerhoff, J., Koroghlanian, C., (et al) (2000) 4. Specter, M (2008) 3 1/23-1/29 4 1/30-2/5 5 2/6-2/12 6 2/13-2/19 7 2/20-2/26 ISD 1. Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2009) 2. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2007) 3. Kraiger, K. (2008) 4. Smith, M. K., & Boling, E. (2009) Behaviorism 1. Driscoll, M. P. (2005) 2. Saettler, P. (1990) 3. Molenda, M. (2008) Cognitivism & Constructivism Comparing across Theories ID Views and Issues (History) 1. Driscoll, M. P. (2005) 2. Silber, K. H., & Foshay, W. R. (2006) 3. Driscoll, M. P. (2005) 4. Wilson, B. G. (1996) 1. Driscoll, M. P. (2007) 2. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993) 3. Reigelugh, C. M. (1997) 1. Molenda, M. (2008) 2. Reiser, R. A. (2007) 3. Saettler, P. (1990) Learning Theories Matrix (Group) 5

6 Dates Topics Readings (Required in italics) Deliverables 8 ID Views and 1. Clark, R. E. (1994) 2/27-3/4 Issues (Trends) 2. Gordon, J., & Zemke, R. (2000) 3. Kozma, R. B. (1994) 4. Zemke, R., & Rossett, A. (2002) 5. Hendel- Giller, R., & Stepich, D. A. (2007) 6. Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009) 9 3/5-3/ /12-3/ /19 3/ /26 4/1 13 4/2 4/8 14 4/9 4/ /16 4/ /23 4/ /30-5/4 HPT Overview 1. Pershing, J. (2006) 2. Van Tiem, D. M., Mosely, J. L., & Dessinger, J. C. (2004) 3. Brethower, D. M. (2008) 4. Gawande, A. (2007, December 10) 5. Rummler, G. A. (2007) HPT History 1. Ferond, C. (2006). 2. Stolovitch, H. D. (2007) HPT Theories & Models Performance Standards, Ethics HPT Trends and Issues Careers and Professional Dev Work on Case 1. Brethower, D. M. (1999) 2. Wilmoth, F. S., Prigmore, C., & Bray, M. (2010) 3. Crossman, D. C. (2010) 1. Banaji, M. R., Bazerman, M. H., & Chugh, D. (2003) 2. Guerra, J. A. (2006) 3. Napper, V., Hadley, K., & Yeaman, A. R. J. ( Klein, J. D. (2002) 2. Pershing, J. A., Lee, J. & Cheng, J. (2008) 3. Cho, Y., & Yoon, S. W. (2010) 1. Bennis, W. (2010) 2. Butler, T., & Waldroop, J. (1999) 3. Paradise, A. (2009, November) 4. Christensen, C. M. (2010) 5. Granovetter, M. S. (1973) No Readings Trends and Issues Spring Break Week! Diagram the Field Work on Case No Readings HPT Case Analysis (Group) Work on No Readings Reflection Paper Reflection paper Presentations (Links to presentations can be found at the course website: Week 2 Introduction to Instructional Technology Part 1 Introduction to Instructional Technology Part 2 Week 3 Part 1 Theories underlying instructional technology Part 2 Guides to planning instruction ISD Models Week 4 Theories of Learning Behaviorism Part 1 Behaviorism Part 2 6

7 Week 5 Cognitivism & Constructivism Part 1: Descriptive Theories Cognitivism & Constructivism Part 2: Prescriptive Theories Week 6 Theories of Learning and Instruction Week 7 Pre- history of IT: 400 B.C. to 1899 Modern History of IT Week 8 Contemporary Issues in Instructional Technology Current Controversies - ISD Week 9 Performance Technology Defining Performance Technology Week 10 History of Performance Technology Performance Engineering Concepts Week 11 (Spring Break) Performance Technology Process General Systems Theory Week 12 Values & Ethics in ET/IT Certification and Performance Standards Week 13 Performance Technology Trends and Issues Contacting the Instructor(s). If you have any questions or concerns, you may post a question in the General Questions forum or send the instructor or associate instructor a message through Oncourse . If you send a message that is urgent, please check the notification box so that someone can reply you as soon as possible. You may also set a time to skype with the professor, or feel free to call the number listed at the top of this form. 7