Models and Methods of Instructional Design CS 411

Models and Methods of Instructional Design CS 411 Digital Education and Learning Analytics Dr. Thanasis Hadzilacos Professor, Open University of Cyprus Visiting Professor, CHILI, EPFL

Slide title The lithosphere is divided into seven major continental tectonic plates (2)

A title and a week • Models and Methods in Instructional Design • 45 minutes or a semester? (3)

Instructional Design (ID)

A show, rather than a lecture Instructional Design about Instructional Design Method: (4) Use Chapter XVI “Comparing Visual Instructional Design Languages: A Case Study” from Handbook of Visual Languages for ID to compare OG with other ID Models.

Structure (08. 15) ● 20’ Introduction: on Instructional Design, modelling, and the methodology of this week. ● 5’ break (08. 40) ● 45’ Read the case study. Draw the OG for the case study. ● Compare OG design with one of (Narrative, E 2 ML, co. UML, po. EML, IMS-LD) – prearranged 09. 25 - 10’ break (09. 35) 25’ Conclusions and questions from each team: strengths and weaknesses of OG as an ID language.

What is design? 1. Think of an example of design. (Have you ever designed something? Design as a noun / design as a verb. Can you point out to a design? ) 2. Give a definition (“Design is …” “We design when …” …) 3. Look it up in the web (Wikipedia? Other? ) 4. Another, different, example 5. Revise your definition

The Roles ● The designer (“Instructional designer”) ● The user (teacher; students? ) ● The implementer (teacher, MOOC engine, OG engine)

Design … ● Architectural design ● Web design ● Application design ● Fashion design ● Artefact design ● Protocol design ● API design ● Product design ● Financial instrument design ●…

What is the output of a design process?

The purpose makes a difference ● to build (the house); or ● to allow others to build the house; or ● to document an existing house; or ● to maintain a house; or ● to re-use the design; or ●…

Analysis ● needs analysis or ● requirements analysis, or ● opportunity analysis, or ● market analysis, or ●…

Analysis produces an answer to: ● Why, what for ● For whom ● The use it will have ● The resources available

Analysis produces an answer to: ● Why, what for ● For whom ● The use it will have ● The resources available ● “Why are we making the bridge? ” ● “What are we designing a new car engine for? ” ● “Who will be using this dictionary? ” ● “this computer will be used in zero-gravity situations” ● money, time, people, knowledge, and technology

Instructional Design Analysis outputs ● The context ● The learning goals

Instructional Design Analysis outputs ● The context ● The learning goals ● Who are the students, what do they already know, why are they studying, … ● What do we want them to learn ● What do they want to learn

not a title nor a table of contents ● A lesson is not a title ● The learning goals are not a table of contents

What about Models & Methods in ID ? Pierre, you said “M&M in ID” ● Well, what about M&M in ID? ● What do you want CS 411 students to learn about them? ● What do you want the students to be able to do in relation to M&M in ID after they finish this lesson? What exactly that they were not doing before?

Bloom’s taxonomy of learning goals ● Evaluation ● Evaluate ● Synthesis ● Create ● Analysis ● Analyze ● Application ● Apply ● Comprehension ● Understand ● Knowledge ● Remember

Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Goals

Choosing our learning goals Focus in the middle to high skills: ● Application, ● Analysis, ● Evaluation and ● add a little bit of understanding and ● a tiny bit of creation. ● Ignore Remembering –you will not remember any of

My choice for learning goals ● Realise that in design there is no ‘best’ model/method/language ● Intelligently select a model and a method for a specific task in ID and be able to justify your choice ● Be able to discuss: is OG a model for instructional design? Is it a method? A language? A tool? ● Compare two ID models

Improving the learning goals Let’s have a short individual activity: ● Add, subtract, change, or improve one of these learning goals. ● Write a short 2 -lline explanation as to why you did this.

OG: not the only model, method, language for ID Now, let’s see what we have been doing so far. Let’s draw the OG of this. ● So you see, you have been instructional designers for the past month when you were drawing OGs!

Other Models and Methods for ID ● Narrative ● E 2 ML ● Co. UML ● POEML ● IMS-LD

Two general-purpose skills for computer scientists ● Design ● Choose, Evaluate, Decide

Design ● Abstract ● Represent ● Model ● Method ● Tool ● Purposful

Quickly understand choose tools ● Programming language ● Framework ● Environment ● Mail client ● Operating System ● Algorithm

and now, for your activity!

The case study ● 16 -hour blended course ● S 1: F 2 F Introduction (3 h, Saturday) ● S 2: Instructional Analysis (3 h – 1 wk) ● S 3: Learning Goals (3 h in 1 wk) ● S 4: Instructional Strategy (3 h – 1 wk) ● S 5: F 2 F Closing (3 h)

Your task now ● Model the case study in OG Add all the detail, e. g. in the activities, according to the OG model ● Compare your OG modelling with the model assigned to your team

Your task now ● Model the case study in OG Add all the detail, e. g. in the activities, according to the OG model ● Compare your OG modelling with the model assigned to your team ● Compare? ● What can you do with one model that you cannot do with the other? ● What can you do better/worse easier/not with one model compared to the other? ● What is left out in each model? ● What would you choose?

Conclusions – E 2 ML ● Planes as well ● Grouping activities into session ● Multiple representations (planes, times) ● Duration not specific ● Description for each session ● Easy to update, to move groups of activities ● Top-down approach ● Dependency diagram (useful as an overview) ● Activity flow (similar to OG) ● Allows more details for activities

Co. UML - Conclusions ● Defines Roles ● Defines Learning Goals ● Documents needed ● Several tables/graphs for hierarchical structure ● Different activities-roles ● Activity diagram similar to OG, allows multiple planes at the same time ● Goals and documents more detailed than OG ● Specifies instructor role ● A change may cause cascading changes

IMS LD - Conclusions ● Nested acts – session – learning activities ● More declarative ● Mode detailed model (feedback, roles, …) ● Timing and sequence not so clear ● Hard to specify relation between activities (e. g. prerequisite) ● Show internal structure of activities ● Not so intuitive graphically ● Flow of activities not so clear (in time) ● Efficient to collect metadata for analytics

OG extension to deal with flexitime ● Add to activities whether timing is flexible, in which case specify range and specifics ● Use hierarchy structure of activities ● Add a property in activity, not fixed ● Add a time frame to activities ● Need a ‘synchronisation’ operator ● A vertical dashed line to indicate longer periodsframeworks ● Group (parallel) activities into sessions ● Special activity, not time fixed

PO EML ● Set of 5 models ● Structural model (content of activities) ● Goal model ● 3 other similar to OG (individual, vs group vs teacher) ● Order/relation between activities ● Temporal model ● Multiple dimensions allow things to be put clearly ● Tree-structure ● ES elements (recursive) ● Each element has its own goals, time etc ● Order model (single directional – no controls)

Narrative based ● Course divided into acts (open – mid – closing points) ● High level model. Too high for activities but good sense of student engagement ● Design student stimulation, motivation, engagement