Tuesday 18 December 2012

On Learning Design

In the process of doing my first review of a journal article, I noticed a frequent reference to the concepts of 'instructional design' and 'learning design'.  While I recognise 'instructional designer' as offering occupational identity, I have never personally resonated with 'design' as a term.  The work I create mixes thought and spontaneity.  Although I plan, why don't I design?

In my last post, I looked at a number of different educational concepts from an etymological position.  'Design', when treated similarly, is related to the Proto Indo-European *sekw- which means "point out".  The Oxford Dictionary of English (3rd ed.) suggests the mass noun version of 'design' as the "purpose or planning that exists behind an action, fact, or object".  Oxford Art Online notes the term's wider use "to describe the aesthetic and functional characteristics of an object" and "as an essential part of the process of making, marketing and selling mass-produced goods".  In general, these definitions construct 'design' as a concept located in development towards production and distribution.
Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Like its root term, 'learning' is derived from *leis- meaning "to furrow; learn".  In contrast, 'instruction' is related to *ster- meaning "to strew, scatter, spread out".  Where 'learning' provides a space for knowledge to grow (and stand), 'instruction' distributes it (if somewhat haphazardly).  When related to 'design', 'learning' and 'instruction' acquire externally-driven structures and procedures.  These constructs find context online.

As those involved in online teaching and learning know, 'design' is a technological approach to education.  Its focus in periodicals, like the Journal of Learning Design (Australia), is "the design of learning experiences for ... students in online, blended and offline learning environments".  Indeed, instructional design is defined as "a technology for the development of learning experiences and environments which promote the acquisition of specific knowledge and skill by students" (p. 2)

The 'how' versus the 'why' dominates the discourse.  This is reflected in a theoretical application where "few if any designers actually use models to confine their practice" (p. 89).  However, early pioneers founded "much of their work on instructional principles derived from research and theory on instruction, learning, and human behavior" (p. 58).  Indeed, the history of design in online education presents strong theoretical positions.  The influence of behavioural psychology on instructional design is seen in references to Robert Gagné and B. F. Skinner.  Whilst acknowledging the technological core of instructional design, Merrill, Drake, Lacy, and Pratt (1996) acknowledge empiricism as a source of validity (p. 1).  There seems little justification for a purely instrumentalist approach.

When I analyse 'learning design', I see a practice-emphasised interpretation of education.  The benefits of this approach is that students are "active inquirers, working on problems that [can be] genuine problems for them (rather than merely problems the teacher ... imposed)" (Phillips, 2007, p. 238).  Unfortunately, the major limitation is relational: participants are easily located as (at best) designers and end-users or (at worst) producers and consumers.  One means for overcoming this may be identifying 'design' as just one means of constructing both the relationship and the process.  Thus, like the ADDIE model for which it forms an integral part, 'design' could be seen as one path to good teaching.

Unlinked Reference
Phillips, D. C. (2007). Theories of teaching and learning. In R. R. Curren (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of education (pp. 232-245). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Monday 10 December 2012

Etymology: The Poster

Along with my colleagues, I developed a poster for the 2012 Vice Chancellor's Symposium held on 30 October at Wellington, New Zealand.  Each poster illustrated a response to the question: "How are we defining ourselves as 21st century scholars?"  The teaching consultants approached the question as a team with multiple posters answering the question in different ways, and branding for uniformity.  My poster (see below) offered an etymological treatment.  This blog post allows me to expand on that poster, and use the research that would not fit on it.

Creative Commons Licence
This work by Katarina Gray-Sharp is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
There are a large number of words associated with academic scholarship.  The poster covered four: "scholar", "learn", "research", and "academic".  In three of the cases,  the poster showed the progression up from the Proto Indo-European root towards the modern English term.  In the fourth case, 'academic', a description in narrative form was offered.

The placement of 'scholar' and 'learn' next to each other was purposeful.  'Scholar', and the related 'scol' (school), is from *segh- which means "to hold in one's power; to have". Comparatively, 'learn', and 'lār-hūs' (lore-house) are from *leis- meaning "to furrow; learn". 'School' replaced 'lore house' over time, moving the linguistic emphasis of education from learning to having.

Outside of the poster, I considered related terms.  'Train', for example, is a derivation of the *tragh- meaning "to drag, train, pull, move". Other derivations include 'abstract', 'distract', and 'portray'. Comparatively, 'teach' is a derivation of the PIE deik- meaning "to teach, show". Other derivations include 'dictate', 'judge', and 'predict'. The two words are connected in matters of the body: tragh- is related to 'foot' as deik- is related to 'toe'. Further, the approaches suggested by the two PIE sources require different but related skillsets.

I continue to be attracted to etymological understandings of the world, and welcome commentary from any who may use this method in their teaching.

Wednesday 5 December 2012

Tweeting & Other Addictions (Part 2)


Earlier today I made a rather spectacular confession: I am a daily Twitter user.  A progressive addiction, the wonders of Bebo, Facebook, and blogging eventually led me into the "hard" stuff of Twitter.  This, the second in a two-part series, provides some hints and a Twerminology, so that you too can start down the slippery slope towards Twitter.

Some Hints
If you need help, use it.  The Twitter Help Centre provides information on everything from the Basics through to Apps, SMS, and Mobile.  To access Help, click on the Gear icon on the top right to open the dropdown menu, and select "Help".

I strongly endorse lists.  Lists is a function available from your profile page that curates groups of Twitter users.  You can only read the Tweets of people in a list - it doesn't allow you to "bulk Tweet".  Lists can include people you do and don't follow.  I have created some lists around topics like "Journalists & Editors" and "Higher Education".  You could create your own list or subscribe to someone else's.  Information on lists (and everything else) is available through the Twitter Help Centre. 

Finding People 
"Who to follow" is a common complaint.  The Huffington Post seems to suggest listening to your existing pool (if any); friend recommendations account for 69 per cent of follows.  Twitter offers some good advice.  I personally recommend using the search function to find Tweets, people, images, and videos of interest.  For example, if you like Massey University, searching "Massey University" will bring up a list of people and Tweets about this topic.  Give it a go.  It could surprise you.

Twerminology
  • At sign (n.): The @ symbol used in tweets to call-out to a specific user.
    I sent a Tweet to @TeachingConsult.
  • Direct message (n.): A private message visible only by the sender and recipient.
         I tried to send him a direct message, but he wasn't following me.
  • Follow (v.): Subscribe.
         I followed @KimKardashian and @KateEMiddleton.
  • Follower (n.): Someone who subscribes to someone else's tweets.
         I have 103 followers. 
  • Gear icon (n.): A tab on the top-right for editing your profile, getting help, or accessing your direct messages.
  • Hashtag (n.): The # symbol used in tweets (without spaces) to mark keywords and topics.
         I searched for #justsaying and found too many Tweets.
  • Home page (n.): Where you land when you sign into Twitter.
         On the right of your home page is your timeline.
  • Me (n.): A tab on the top navigation bar used to open your profile page.
  • Search (n.): A box on the top navigation bar for finding Tweets and people. 
  • Timeline (n.): The stream of the Tweets made by those you follow.
  • Tweet (n.): A 140-character, publicly-visible post.
         I deleted my Tweet, because it made me sound like a twit.
  • Tweet (v.): To compose and make publicly visible a 140-character post.
         I clicked on the blue, quill button, and Tweeted the link.
  • Twitter (n.): A social media site.
         Someone saw my Twitter profile and signed up to follow me.
  • Username (n.): Or "Twitter handle". Identifier of 15 characters or less.

Tweeting & Other Addictions (Part 1)

I have a confession to make: I am a daily Twitter user.  I gained this addiction progressively, moving from the "soft stuff" of Facebook to the "hard" world of Twitter in what seemed like moments.  Once I hooked my Twitter up to automatically update my work Facebook profile and page, I never looked back.  It was a fast and glorious fall.
If you're new to social media, Twitter may seem ridiculously complicated.  Don't worry; you're not alone.  The Pew Internet & American Life Project reports that while 66 per cent of online adult Americans use Facebook, only 16 per cent use Twitter.  The Otago Daily Times reports a rise from 12 per cent (2011) in New Zealand to 19 per cent (2012).  Despite the article's title, I'm not sure Kiwis really are "tweety birds".

The difficulties of negotiating social media (and its wider societal implications) can make even well-respected bloggers cautious. And that is why this hardened social media addict is here to save the day, providing advice to the Twitter newbie.

How to Twitter
Create An Account:
Visit https://twitter.com/ and complete the "New to Twitter?" box.  On the next screen, read the Terms and Conditions and click "Create my account".

Find Somebody to Follow:
Twitter will offer you a list of popular profiles to follow.  You must select (or find) 10 in order to progress to the next stage.  (Don't worry.  You can always "Unfollow" Kim Kardashian later.)  I recommend following @TeachingConsult.  Why?  Because it's me, of course.
Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

An option is offered to search your Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail or AOL contact lists.  You can select "Skip" to move on.

Build Your Profile:
You can now upload a photo of yourself and write a 160-character bio.  Or you can select "Skip" to move on.

Confirm Your Email Address:
Twitter will ask you to reconfirm your email address.

Get Tweeting!
Click on the blue, quill button on the top right.  A box will appear.  Type something spectacular.  Click "Tweet".

(Then Deleting...)
Twitter regret is more common than people like to think.  To delete that errant Tweet, click "Me" on the top navigation bar to open your profile.  A list of your Tweets will appear.  Locate the Tweet.  Hover your mouse and click "Delete" when it appears.  For more information on deleting, see the Twitter Help Centre.