For many years, I have disliked the term 'instructional design' with its connotations of teacher-led, behavourist based and non-collaborative learning slant. My current position of 'educational developer' is the combination of educational designer and 'staff'developer' roles. Again, not the best description of a role entailing much more than curriculum design and 'training' of teachers. My role is instead very much that of a changeagent and 'meddler in the middle'. I work at empowering teachers to develop curriculum which is true to their disciplinary grounding but also meeting the learning needs of their students along with meeting accreditation requirements. The teachers I work with 'own' their programme of learning. To do that, they need to be involved from the start as they are the ones who will do the work to make alive, their curriculum design. in many other juristrictions, curriculum is developed and imposed on teachers. This leads to content focus rather than pedagogical practice development.
So my role is very much people focused. Technology is used as a tool to 'enhance learning' and when learning and teaching has to shift online, it is the learning and teaching that has to take precedence, not the digital components of the programme.
Instructional design (ID) itself has come a long way from its behavourist roots. Many people working in the ID field are avid constructivists. The current mode is for IDs to work as 'critical friends' to integrate 'student and learning centredness' into the design of courses, programmes and curriculum. However, the field is rife with books and websites focussed on the processes for enacting ID - i.e. ADDIE, backward design etc. The philosophical beliefs of 'instructional designer' on teaching and learning is not as visible, especially on digital resources. Therefore, it is refreshing to see a site (hybridpedagogy) discussing the need for instructional designers to adopt a critical stance to inform their work. In particular, to remember and act on 'critical pedagogy' (Freire), that is education is not just a process 'done' to students; but a co-constructed experience, allowing for both learners and teachers to reach their potential through learning.
I have started putting time into reading the literature on learning design and ID. As usual, there is very little in the field focused on vocational education. Almost all work assumes learning is undertaken either in the formal school or higher education sector. There is also strong priviledging of text-based learning. Therefore, there is much to be done on synergising the precepts of learning design and ID to meet the needs of practice-based learning. The technology is now available to offer simulations which are useful but these have to be used carefully as not all components of practice can be replicated within virtual environments. The most telling is the 'sociomaterial' aspects of learning skills, the interactions people have with tools, materials, machines, work environment etc. Thes important interactions people have with non-human entities, provide nuanced feedback required to be acted on. Through these interactions, the 'workmanship of risk' can be actioned. VR environments currently unable to provide all the sensory experiences which encompass the sociomaterial. So vocational education learning design is challenged by trying to replace the f2f and 'hands-on' aspects of practice.
https://hybridpedagogy.org/call-for-contributors-the-critical-instructional-design-reader/
No comments:
Post a Comment