I want to start this reflection with stating that my experience with LT 7100 is different than the typical student but then I stop myself. What is the typical Instructional Design and Technology student? I have no answer, no one is typical, there is no standard background you need to pursue a career in IDT. Which eases my mind because I felt like I would not be adequate in the Master’s program and if I chose to go a more structured IDT path in my career’s future.
I really appreciate starting the course out with the article “The Proper Way to Become an Instructional Technologist.” It gave me the boost of confidence I needed to know and feel like I belong in this new world. I feel like our two textbooks cover different aspects of IDT so I would like to reflect on them separately.
The Real World Instructional Design textbook has covered an introduction to ID, learner needs and characteristics. It starts off explaining the basic idea of instructional design which included the ADDIE model, Stanford’s Model, five elements of design, five phases of design, the essential triangle of ID and ASC cycle. When I read everything separately it makes sense but when I try to look at the big picture and put all the ideas in practice I am not sure what to use where? Are certain models ideal for certain situations? I know that this confusion showed in my case study because I related the situation to ADDIE and not the Five Phases of ID. In the second chapter it discussed the importance of keeping the learner at the center of ID planning and constantly evaluating the design progress in relation to their needs. I believe this is one of the major issues with higher education, a majority of time the faculty/ instructor only evaluates the student at the end. They base instruction on what they believe the student should be able to accomplish and sometimes that is a false sense. I am trying to figure out how to incorporate the variety of ID models into higher ed faculty development.
In An Overview of Training and Development: Why Training Matters we looked at an introduction on training and development as well as about the work which covered different training products and services. On page 4, it states “Training and Development specialist typically create, administer, and deliver training programs for businesses and organization” which fits into my personal ideas of IDT. However, then in Chapter 2 it states “instructors often teach courses developed by different Training and Development professionals, such as instructional designers.” Then the textbook goes on to explain all that is included into an instructors guide: explanations of concepts, suggestion for discussion, hints during activities, and additional guidance. This is where I do not agree with the textbook. The best teachers are those who are passionate about their content, materials and lessons. If the instructor is just relaying the information, how effective could they be? I also cannot wrap my head around why the person(s) delivering the ID product would not be considered a key stakeholders and want a say in what they would be presenting. I don’t know, maybe it’s my type A personality but I could not imagine having someone else create all of my content for me and then just presenting it? However, maybe I am taking things to the extreme and not thinking about the happy medium.
One of my main issues when reading and completing our coursework is that I relate everything to higher education. I need to make a conscious effort to think about the other worlds of IDT can be implemented and open my mind to other possibilities.