Running Head: The Journey to My M.E.T.
The Journey to My Master of Educational Technology - Rational Paper
Barbara Herman
Spring, 2010
Boise State University
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
AECT Standards 4
Standard 1: Design 4
1.1 Instructional Systems Design (ISD) 4
1.2 Message Design 4
1.3 Instructional Strategies 5
1.4 Learner Characteristics 5
Standard 2: Development 6
2.1 Print Technologies 7
2.2 Audiovisual Technologies 7
2.3 Computer-Based Technologies 8
2.4 Integrated Technologies 8
Standard 3: Utilization 9
3.1 Media Utilization 9
3.2 Diffusion of Innovations 10
3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization 11
3.4 Policies and Regulations 11
Standard 4: Management 12
4.1 Project Management 12
4.2 Resource Management 12
4.3 Delivery System Management 13
4.4 Information Management 13
Standard 5: Evaluation 14
5.1 Problem Analysis 14
5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement 14
5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation 15
5.4 Long-Range Planning 16
Conclusion 16
References 18
Introduction
This rationale paper illustrates my educational journey through the Master’s of Educational Technology program at Boise State University. My educational journey began after high school. It started with receiving an Electronic Technician Diploma in Computer Programming for Business through DeVry Institute of Technology in Chicago, Illinois. I want on to receive an Associate’s Degree in Science from the College of DuPage in Glen Ellen, Illinois, followed by a Bachelor of Arts in Elementary Education from Governors State University in University Park, Illinois. I currently hold Illinois Standard Teaching Certificate that includes endorsements in Mathematics, Computer Applications, and Middle School. Currently I am teaching computer technology to students in kindergarten to fifth grade in suburb outside Chicago, Illinois. My teaching experience has led me to pursue a master’s degree in educational technology. Now that I am at the end of my journey to my Master Degree this rationale paper connects a variety of projects I completed to the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Standards (AECT); for which Boise State University bases its curriculum for their Master of Educational Technology program.
Keywords: AECT, education, technology
AECT Standards
Standard 1: Design
Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to design conditions for learning by applying principles of instructional systems design, message design, instructional strategies, and learner characteristics.
1.1 Instructional Systems Design (ISD)
Instructional Systems Design (ISD) is an organized procedure that includes the steps of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating instruction. Within the application of this definition, ‘design’ is interpreted at both a macro- and micro-level in that it describes the systems approach and is a step within the systems approach. The importance of process, as opposed to product, is emphasized in ISD.
I developed a clear understanding of standard 1.1 by designing the WebQuest, Internet Search Engines, for EdTech 503 Instructional Design. My Wetpaint Wiki contains the components I used to design the WebQuest and these components reflect the steps listed in the standard. The analyzing step is reflected in goal analysis, analyzing learner characters, and performance context and learning context analysis sections. The designing and development steps are reflected in the performance objects, development of instructional strategies and WebQuest sections. The last two steps, implementing and evaluating are represented in the last five sections of the wiki. An example of the macro- and micro-level of the ISD process is the needs assessment because it includes the initial student survey and the data that was used to determine if there was need to teach the use of Internet search engines. Dick, Carey & Carey (2005) indicate two reasons the ISD works. First, “is the focus, at the outset, on what the learners are to know or be able to do when the instruction is concluded” (p. 8). Second, “the careful linkage between each component, especially the relationship between instructional strategy and the desired learning outcome” (p. 8). I succeeded in creating a product using the ISD process that set out to teach students to search the Internet because of the data from the pre-survey compared to the post-survey data.
1.2 Message Design
“Message design involves planning for the manipulation of the physical form of the message” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 31). Message design is embedded within learning theories (cognitive, psychomotor, behavioral, perceptual, affective, constructivist) in the application of known principles of attention, perception, and retention which are intended to communicate with the learner. This sub-domain is specific to both the medium selected and the learning task.
I selected the procedural image from EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, to represent my understanding of standard 1.2. This visual promotes the constructivist learning theory by providing the learner with different experiences that connect to the textbook and the real world. The learner can clearly see the task at hand by reading the three steps of the discovery exercise and reinforce the activity by watching the video. Along with the Constructivist Learning Theory, a cognitive approach was achieved too by supporting what the learners see in the textbook. The instructional strategies for this visual follow the Scott Foresman textbook, and can be used independent of the textbook to build prior knowledge. Clark and Lyons (2004) provided five guidelines to follow when creating procedure visuals (p. 224-247). These guidelines give me a new perspective on the many ways a learner will interpret any given visual. The guidelines enhanced my awareness about cognitive loads on the novice learner and furthered my understanding of near and far transfer of visual information by the learner.
1.3 Instructional Strategies
“Instructional strategies are specifications for selecting and sequencing events and activities within a lesson” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 31). In practice, instructional strategies interact with learning situations. The results of these interactions are often described by instructional models. The appropriate selection of instructional strategies and instructional models depends upon the learning situation (including learner characteristics), the nature of the content, and the type of learner objective.
I selected the WebQuest, An Out of this World WebQuest, created in EdTech 502, Internet for Educators because it incorporates inquiry-based learning. “Inquiry-based learning is a learning process through questions generated from the interests, curiosities, and perspectives/experiences of the learner” (Sincero, 2005). “A WebQuest is an inquiry-oriented lesson format in which most or all the information that learners work with comes from the web” (Dodge, 2007). I used the learner characteristics, 3rd to 5th graders, as a guide to the nature of content and the type of learning objective found in the WebQuest. The WebQuest format guides the learner through the lesson. Then, the learners’ interaction with the web via the WebQuest provided the learner with the knowledge necessary to create the final project. I liked creating this lesson using the WebQuest format because it makes learning fun the student.
Other examples of mastery of this standard are the Jigsaw activity, Searching the Internet Effectively, and the scavenger hunt, What’s Legal Scavenger Hunt, created in the same class. Aronson (2010) writes, “the jigsaw process encourages listening, engagement, and empathy by giving each member of the group an essential part to play in the academic activity.” Starr (1999) writes “Internet scavenger hunts are a way for students to practice problem solving, improve their reading and comprehension skills, and learn how to search the Internet.” These instructional strategies that I previously illustrated interact with the learning situation. Creating these web activities showed me how to integrate technology with learning strategies used before the computers found their way into the classroom.
1.4 Learner Characteristics
“Learner characteristics are those facets of the learner’s experiential background that impact the effectiveness of a learning process” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 32). Learner characteristics impact specific components of instruction during the selection and implementation of instructional strategies. For example, motivation research influences the selection and implementation of instructional strategies based upon identified learner characteristics. Learner characteristics interact with instructional strategies, the learning situation, and the nature of the content.
I selected my Digital Divide White Paper from EdTech 501, Introduction to Educational Technology, to map this standard because the research sited in the paper shows that there is a divide in Internet access in the United States. The research shows that learner situations are influenced by the lack of Internet access, the more rural and economically disadvantaged the area the less likely they will have Internet access. The research supports the fact that there are limitations for instructional strategies that are integrated with technology, specifically the Internet. I am now aware that there are many people that do not have access to the Internet, thus are denied access to technology rich instruction.
I also included the character analysis done during the EdTech 503, Instructional Design, to represent my understanding of the standard 1.4. Analyzing the learner characteristics for the Internet Search Engine WebQuest directly impacted how I designed the project. After reviewing the data, I realized that the learners did not know what a search engine was, so I knew I needed to develop learning aids that would explain how the Internet works and the different types of searches. I created two videos, An Internet Search Begins with You and The Search Begins to assist the learner in understanding how to do an effective Internet search. I decided to create videos so the learners can review them at anytime, thus building on prior knowledge. Developing the character analysis showed me the importance of knowing the knowledge base of my learner before creating the lesson, and how the character analysis impacted my development of the lesson.
Standard 2: Development
Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to develop instructional materials and experiences using print, audiovisual, computer-based, and integrated technologies.
The complete Earth Unit Visual I designed in EdTech506, Instructional Message Design, fulfills each sub standard for Standard 2. The entire visual can be printed or used as a computer-based learning activity. Each lesson in the visual can be used by itself as a mini-lesson or as a whole unit lesson. There are many printable worksheets and the visuals can be printed to use without a computer (Standard 2.1). I created a variety of audiovisuals using different technologies such as Audacity, Microsoft Recorder, Demo Creator, and others (2.2). Along with the audiovisuals I created, I also used computer-based technologies from Adobe. For example, Adobe Fireworks was used to create and produce 90% of all the visuals within this project (2.3). Finally, I made the visual interactive by providing the learner with hyperlinks, videos to watch, automatically playing auto tracks, and much more (2.4). This visual has changed the way I look at online curriculum and I plan to create more visuals using these skills and methods.
2.1 Print Technologies
“Print technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials, such as books and static visual materials, primarily through mechanical or photographic printing processes” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 37). Print technologies include verbal text materials and visual materials; namely, text, graphic and photographic representation and reproduction. Print and visual materials provide a foundation for the development and utilization of the majority of other instructional materials.
The principals image I created during EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, is my example of the print technologies standard. Each image in the visual can be printed and used in paper form. I designed printable charts so the students could use them to document a plant growth experiment. I provided demonstration video on how to complete the charts which are self explanatory making is possible for the students to complete without the video aid. To manage the learners’ cognitive load I kept the words and images to a minimum. A second grade teacher I shared this visual with commented that the students enjoyed the interactivity, the videos, and the overall design. I have plans to make more interactive visual to assist learning after hearing that the students enjoyed the interactivity with technology.
2.2 Audiovisual Technologies
“Audiovisual technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials by using mechanical devices or electronic machines to present auditory and visual messages” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 38). Audiovisual technologies are generally linear in nature, represent real and abstract ideas, and allow for learner interactivity dependent on teacher application.
The concept visual from EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, was designed following the 6 guidelines in chapter 12 of Graphics for Learning by Clark and Lyons (pp. 249-263). On each image I displayed more than two representational images and text, one for natural and one for not a natural resource. The placement of a counter example, of the not a natural resource, will assist the learner in building an accurate mental model of natural resources. Placing the text next to each photo allows the learner to visualize other natural and not natural resources they will encounter throughout their life. Displaying a natural resource and not a natural resource together applies the contiguity principle allowing the learner to clearly see the differences. I organized the visuals with the natural resource above the not a natural resource to stress the importance of knowing a nature resource. I engaged the learners by using a page curl with a hot spot that makes the learner click to move to the next visual. On the last page of the visual there is an activity for the learners to further their understanding of the concept of natural resources. As a teacher, creating this visual reinforced the importance of showing comparisons to the learner in order to understand the concept being illustrated.
2.3 Computer-Based Technologies
“Computer-based technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials using microprocessor-based resources” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 39). Computer-based technologies represent electronically stored information in the form of digital data. Examples include computer-based instruction (CBI), computer-assisted instruction (CAI), computer-managed instruction (CMI), telecommunications, electronic communications, and global resource/reference access.
In EdTech 503, Instructional Design, I built the Internet Search Engine WebQuest around several videos I created to support the learning of how Internet searches work and the different kinds of searches the learner can initiate. The idea behind the WebQuest is to have the students create a word processing document to record their data. This will allow them to see differences in the number of web site hits when using different Boolean search strategies. The videos I produced explain the different search engines that people can use, show the learner how to do a search, and explain how I wanted the learner to record the results in the word processor. The biggest learning experience I had was creating the videos. This was the first time I used Windows Movie Maker so production took longer than I had anticipated. I housed the WebQuest on my school district’s web server and quickly realized that the video format was not working. To correct this problem I found the software Prism Video Convertor and converted the videos from .wmv format to .mov format. As for the students actually doing the WebQuest, I realized that computer-assisted instruction was going to be a major stepping stone for them. You can read the raw data from the students and realize they struggled with me being the facilitator. To address this issue I will be stepping into the teacher-role more offend instead of facilitator-role. I will introduce each phase of the lesson regardless of the progression of the student groups. However, after the introduction, I will continue to reinforce the projects intent to encourage students to use the materials provided to assist them in completing the lesson.