Reading 1.2: Competencies for the new-age instructional designer

A rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth and almost off-topic preface

Once again I drag out my soapbox and climb wearily upon it, to saw away at a familiar tome - my apologies to any who have endured my rhetoric before.

Although I should be immune by now, I am constantly astounded at the sheer volume of academic literature that continues to give 'shout-outs' to Marc Prensky and his 'work' (2001 ad infinitum) on defining new classes of learners based on their generational age and technological immersion.

While Prensky's writings offered all the entertainment of a visiting circus and provided a scaffold on which self-proclaimed "new-age" academics could hang their learned traditionalist colleagues, surely the raft of valid criticisms raised in peer-reviewed literature (Kennedy et al, 2010; Bennet et al, 2008; Jones & Czerniewicz, 2010) in recent times cannot continue to be ignored. And yet we persist in pushing the 'moral panic' barrow of self-loathing in academia.

Frankly, it is my view that students have always been disenfranchised with the learning content offered to them; what has changed is that they now have greater voice as a result of the 'emancipation' provided by technology, and by rapidly changing social and parenting standards. Admittedly, these net generations haved taken disaffection to a higher artform (I visualise younger learners with iPod headphones in their ears as I write) and we do need to radically transform learning in response to knowledge economies and knowledge industries - but at what point does this incessant screeching stop?

And so it is that I am suspicious of any literature that cites Prensky's 'digital immigrant' paradigm as valid, peer accepted literature. Just sayin'.

Wiping the spittle from my chin, and moving on

Sims and Koszalka identify the four ibstpi® skills domains and their competencies as including.

Competencies from the professional foundations skills domain (pp. 572-573):

• the competency to communicate effectively in visual, oral, and written form
• the competency to update and improve ... knowledge, skills, and attitudes pertaining to instructional design and related fields
• the competency to identify and resolve ethical and legal implications of design in the workplace.

Competencies from the planning and analysis skills domain (p. 573):

• the competency to condust a needs assessment
• the competency to design a curriculum or program
• the competency to select and use a variety of techniques for determining instructional content
• the competency to identify and describe target population characteristics
• the competency to analyse the characteristics of the environment
• the competency to reflect upon the elements of a situation before finalising design solutions and strategies

Competencies from the design and development skills domain (p.573):

• the competency to select and use a variety of techniques to define and sequence the instructional content and strategies
• the competency to develop instructional materials
• the competency to design instruction that reflects an understanding of the diversity of learners and groups of learners

Competencies from the implementation and management skills domain (pp. 573):

• the competency to promote collaboration, partnerships, and relationships among the participants in a design project

References


Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786.

Jones, C. and Czerniewicz, L. (2010), Describing or debunking? The net generation and digital natives. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26: 317–320. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00379.x

Kennedy, G., Judd,B., Dalgarnot, B., Waycott,J.,(2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 332-343
 
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives,digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 5, 1-6

Sims, R., and Koszalka, T. (2008). Competencies for the new-age instructional designer. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Van Merrienboer, & P. Driscoll (Eds). Handbook of Research on educational commmunications and technology, 3e. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Learning design: my current understanding

Activity 1.1 asks that I descibe my current understanding of learning design, based on my experience: potentially including theories or philosophies that guide my practice; my role as a learning designer for education and training programs; and describing the field of learning design to a colleague who is not a designer.

Background

In the early 1990s I was the first enrolled student at the Joondalup Campus of the North Metropolitan College of TAFE (now West Coast Institute of Training) in Western Australia. The college was purpose-built by the state government as a proof-of-concept institution dedicated to the introduction of open learning in WA. Within a few months of study I was offered a casual and then part-time staff position as an "open learning facilitator", the exciting new evolution of the traditional lecturer. Within six months I was 'facilitating' as a full time member of staff while studying higher qualifications.

An early tenet of the program was that of 'facilitated learning' - as opposed to traditional transmission models of teaching - in which facilitators did not present themselves as the source of all knowing, but instead guided the learner to appropriate resources with which they constructed their own learning as they journeyed along self-defined pathways.

The project was a spectacular failure on a number of fronts, the reasons for which are beyond the scope of this discussion.

What is of interest, though, is that I commenced my teaching career in an environment dedicated to learning design rather than transmission-based learning, while most of my learning colleagues were 'trained for transmission' and are now struggling to overcome their hardwiring to be able to embrace learning design.

However, when I reflect on my professional journey I realise I was trained in an environment created on instructional design rather than learning design, and I now wonder about the distinctions between the two, and how the differences might limit or impact on my effectiveness as a good teacher. Is there a distinction between the two? If there is, is it important and should I consider it while I aim at continuous improvement?

My previous studies in the Masters of Education program suggests there are critical differences, and that I should be able to define these differences if I intend to address skills and knowledge shortages in my own praxis.

Instructional design vs. learning design

It would seem to me that instructional design is rigid and linear in nature, 'focused on fixed, pre-packaged solutions' (Goodyear, 2005). It is inflexibly hierarchicial and sequential, lending itself solely to transmission models of learning, in which neither the instructor nor the instructed has the core focus, but instead the learning objects and artifacts themselves are of the highest importance. Perhaps this in itself suggests that instructional design is a transitional form of learning and teaching between archaic transmission models and proper learning design.

Instructional design tends to be situated in the realism paradigm, in that it is based on the epistemological assumption that the 'truth' of the matter to be learned is separate to the cognitive processes of the learner, that the 'reality' of the matter can be determined by collecting the relevant information. It is a mechanistic, or teleological process.

Learning design, however, is creative and heuristic, in that it provides the learner with processes and opportunities for discovery and problem solving, leading to learning that is based in informed judgement based on experience rather than rote learning or systematic analysis of data. It is situated in a relativist paradigm in that it allows for 'truth' to be contextualised to the individual learner, it is constructivist and often best when it is co-constructive, and is reflective in nature.

Describing learning design to a lay colleague

Learning design is a constructivist approach that 'focuses on the pedagogy and the activity of the student rather than ... the content' (Cross & Conole, 2009, p. 2). That is, the focus is on the activity of the student rather than a prescription of learning content and transmission-based (passive, 'learn-and-regurgitate') delivery. Design is focussed on the 'active process involved in building knowledge rather than assuming knowledge is a set of unchanging propositions which merely need to be understood and memorised' (Somekh & Lewin, 2011, p. 321).

As practitioners we are told that we are equipping our learners to solve problems that have not yet been defined, and for roles that have not yet been considered. Increasingly, learning design is about equipping the learner to learn, providing the tools for life-long learning and self-mediated learning, as opposed to predefined curricula and content.

References

Cross, C. and Conole, G. (2009). Learn about learning design. UK: Institute of Educational Technology, the Open University. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Learn-about-learning-design_v7.doc

Conole, G. et al (2009). Learning Design Vs. Instructional Design [Electronic mailing list]. Retrieved from http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2536

Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Joural of Educational Technology, 21(1), 82-101. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet21/goodyear.html

Somekh, B. and Lewin, C. (eds) (2011). Theory and methods in social research 2e. London: Sage

References

Cross, C., and Conole, G. (2009). Learn about learning design. UK: Institute of Educational Technology, the Open University. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Learn-about-learning-design_v7.doc

• Abstract: This five page document presents an introduction to learning design. It was written as a staff briefing paper in January 2009. There are sections asking what it is, who's doing it, how does it work, why is it significant, what are the drawbacks and links including to what the OU is doing.

Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 21(1), 82-101. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet21/goodyear.html

• Abstract: There is a growing demand for advice about effective, time efficient ways of using ICT to support student learning in higher education. This paper uses one such area of activity - networked learning - as a context in which to outline a novel approach to educational design. The paper makes two main contributions. It provides a high level view of the educational design problem space. It then introduces the patterns based approach to educational design. While other professional communities, particularly in software engineering, have been developing patterns based approaches to sharing and re-using design experience, this paper goes back to the original conceptions of participatory design that informed Christopher Alexander's early work on patterns and pattern languages. In particular, it makes connections between the technicalities of design and the central place of values. A patterns based approach can help with encoding, sharing and using knowledge for educational design. But it is also a powerful way of connecting educational values and vision to the details of the tasks, tools and resources we offer our students. 

Sims, R., and Koszalka, T. (2008). Competencies for the new-age instructional designer. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Van Merrienboer, & P. Driscoll (eds). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 3d. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retreieved from http://www.aect.org/edtech/edition3/ER5849x_C042.fm.pdf

A working glossary of sociology

As a scientist (see my earlier post on concept mapping) I am accustomed to words in the scientific vocabulary having and holding an agreed definition within the scientific community. It is my experience, however, that sociology (social sciences, social research, ad nauseum) proposes a baffling array of definitions for key terms that are open to argument, counter-argument, and reinvention. I find myself holding oddly dialogic discussions in my consciousness as I write for my Masters (which I am confident those in the field would argue is a positive) that have me a) questioning my sanity at times, and b) yearning for the commonality in language that science provides.

Hence, I 'adapt' from the glossary of a previous unit to provide myself with a standardised vocabulary from this point forward.

From Somekh, B. & Lewin, C. (eds) (2011). Theory and methods in social research 2e. London: Sage, unless otherwise indicated.

co-construction

the process whereby interaction (dialogue, working together) between two or more people leads to constructing knowledge, or identity, and so forth.

cognitive

the inner processes of the mind by which knowledge is constructed and organised, such as awareness, perception, reasoning and judgement.

conceptual framework

in quantitative research is the set of concepts and indicators that provide an overall description of the field of study. The research can then be designed to collect data that cover all aspects of the framework.

constructivism

a theory of knowledge which stresses the active process involved in building knowledge rather than assuming that knowledge is a set of unchanging propositions which merely need to be understood and memorised.

critical theory

[originating from the Frankfurt School and based on the work of Marx] emphasises the importance of analysing the unspoken and implicit power relations governing actions and understandings, [incorporating] the notion of 'false consciousness' to describe how individuals are disempowered by the social structures which shape how they think as well as how they act.

dialectic

a method of argument that refers to the shaping of ideas through considering oppositional points of view, challenging one with the other and reaching conclusions through a process of recognising the competing claims made by each. It ... assumes progress in ideas through the development of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.

dialogic strategies (dialogue)

research methods which involve discussion between participants and genuine sharing of ideas on the basis of equality.

emancipation

'setting free' - [a key] concept of post-Marxist theory [in which] individuals can be freed from ideological constraints imposed by society ... by learning to analyse their social context and experiences critically to uncover hidden mechanisms of power and control.

empricism (empirical)

an approach to research which assumes that all concepts are derived from experience [which] gives high priority to the collection of data by observation (using the five senses...). It is often used to criticise quanitative research, but qualitative research that involves interviewing, observing, or capturing images in the field of study, is also empirical and can drift into empiricism if ... not interpreted and theorised correctly.

epistemology

philosophical questions relating to the nature of knowledge and truth.

globalisation

the growing economic interdependence of countries across the world... whereby the concerns of individuals and nation states are becoming increasingly dependent upong international economic trends, flows of capital, the activities of multi-national companies, and policy borrowing across countries and continents.

heuristic

the process of discovery or problem-solving that is central to the research process [which] involves informed judgement grounded in experience rather than systematic analysis of data. It is the creative, heuristic process that takes researchers beyond the data to deeper insights.

holistic

a research process which does not fragment or categorise data prior to analysis but, instead, looks at all the data in relation to one another, and makes judgements on the basis of the big picture.

instruments

materials developed by researchers for data collection and analysis [including] interview schedules/protocols, questionnaires, pro-forma for observations, record sheets for coding, and so forth.

interpretivist

research in the hermeneutic tradition which seeks to uncover meaning and understand the deeper implications revealed in data about people, [encompassing] a wide range of research approaches including ethnography and case study.

Marxism

the social, economic and political theories developed by Karl Marx through a process of historical analysis [focused] on who controls the means of production and the inequalities inherent in capitalism between capital and labour.

methodology

in its narrowest sense is the collection of methods or rules by which a particular piece of research is undertaken and judged to be valid. [In a broader sense] the whole system of principles, theories and values that underpin a particular approach to research.

modernity (or modernism)

the system of thought and broad cultural movement (involving art, architecture, poetry and the like) which developed at the end of the nineteenth and during the first half of the twentieth century [which is] often used by postmodernists to signal connotations of unwarranted certainty and structural solidity which attempts to impose control by means of rationality.

objectivity (objectivist, objective)

the removal of the persona (emotions, knowledge, experiences, values and so forth) of the researcher from the research process [central] to the quality of research based on epistemological assumptions that truth can be determined as something distinct from particular contexts or participants.

ontological (ontology, ontologically)

philosophical requestions relating to the nature of being and reality, or otherise, of existence.

paradigms

describe an approach to research which provides a unifying framework of understanding of knowledge, truth, values, and the nature of being. There are a number of different paradigms (e.g. interpretivism, positivism).

positivist (positivism)

an approach to resarch based on the assumption that knowledge can be discovered by collecting data through observation, measurement and experimentation to establish truth, [which has] proved problematic because human behaviour and social interaction are unpredictable and not easily susceptible to control and measurement [leading to] strongly negative connotations.

praxis

the process of embedding the development of theory in practical action. Theory and practice are seen as reciprocal rather than hierarchical or sequential.

rationality

establishing concepts and theories by rational means, using logical reasoning.

realism (real, realist, reality)

the epistemological assumption that truth can bett determined as something distinct from the processes of  mind, [that] there is a reality 'out there' which can be investigated and understood on the basis of collecting data and identifying supporting evidence.

relexivity (reflexive)

combines the process of reflection with self-critical analysis [as] a means whereby social science researchers are able to explore their own subjectivity, be more aware of [their impact] on the research data [and] increase the sensitivity of their analysis and interpretation of data.

relativism

a philosophical position that holds that truth is not constant but varies in relation to context, time, circumstances, and so forth.

social constructivism

the process by which phenomena in the social world are formed and sustained by social structures and interactions rather than being constants that conform to natural laws. Researchers who adopt this approach are likely to use mainly qualitative rathern than quantitative methods.

structure and agency

refers to the [debate] about the degree to which individuals have free will or are constrained by circumstances, [particularly referring to] social norms and organisational/administrative structures within which individuals live.

subjectivity (subjectivist)

the human persona (emotions, knowledge, experience, values, and so forth) [which when applied to the researcher as a research instrument] is seen as central to the quality of certain types of research based on epistemological assumptions that truth is not something that can be 'found' [separate to] particular contexts or participants in the area of study.

teleological

explaining or evaluating events and phenomena in terms of their outcomes [often] used by social science researchers to indicate a mechanistic process.

theoretical framework

the body of theory which governs all the decisions made in carrying out research (from methods of data collection and analysis to the nature of the knowledge outcomes).

theories

explanations or propositions. In the natural sciences they are generally regarded as guiding truths, until proved false by new data or experimentation. In the social sciences they are more open to challenge, especially if the methodology is grounded in epistemological assumptions that truth and reality are socioculturally constructed. Social science reserach normally starts with a theoretical framework and develops new theories (or variations of existing theories) as research outcomes.

value

[in social science denotes] the entire set of beliefs and principles which underpin a set of judgements or a particular endeavour.

Mindmapping for the left-brained scientist

A task assigned early in the unit is to develop skills in concept/mind mapping, blogs and wikis. I use wikis in the workplace for project development work, team activities, and student learning and teaching, so, "check". I'm recording my learning journal to the world's favourite blog site, "check". Concept/mind mapping? Sigh. I view the pretty sample pictures in the courseware, and quickly understand the power offered by the tools, and can also understand why right-brained 'creatives' would enjoy and even use such things.

But I'm a left-brained scientist. I might doodle absent-mindedly on the edge of a page and I do actually have a secret desire to be a satire cartoonist, but really - come on. Representing thinking processes and learning concepts with hand drawn pictures. It's a struggle, but I manage to restrain my enthusiasm. After all, I'm a scientist - my thinking is clear, logical and linear. One of my mindmaps would just be a straight line showing an obvious progression from alpha to omega, with pertinent points clearly labeled on the continuum.

However, I accept that my left-brainedness imposes its own restrictions and so I journey bravely into new territory. I decide to apply some of this great white magic to a course reading, Transforming our models of learning and development (Kraiger, 2008), to be able to say I'd at least given it "the old college try" before abandoning it forever.

I reluctantly sneak some Reflex from the printer tray - a taboo practice in our home office - and find some real, physical, tangible honest-to-goodness pencils (with sharpener) and eraser (that's Ctrl-Z, right?) and set about mapping instructional models in first, second and third generations. Noting a timeline hidden in the text, a straight timeline emerges from my central theme, with relevant decades and key players appropriately scaled in. ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) unfolds from the First generation limb, I sketch in Goldstein's contributions with Instructional Systems Design (ISD) in the '70's, linking this back with a dashed line to ADDIE to show the relationship, and across to the timeline...

Adding the word INSTRUCTOR in large, blocked font to illustrate the primary theoretical approach, I give the instructor limbs showing the central role and importance, with "Gain Attention", "Inform Objectives", "Present Material" and others capitalised out boldly on limbs as functions of the instructor, with the learner added, almost as an afterthought, on spindly sub-branches to each function. Smaller again, I add the learner's attributes and roles - "passive!" and "absorb!".

I like that.

It looks pretty good.

I find myself wishing for someone to show it to, "Look how cleverly I've diagramised this information!" I'd say, "Look, isn't this clearer than this boring text article?" I know from experience that the attentions of my long-suffering wife should be reserved for proofing my papers before submission, expecting her to be excited at each of my efforts may be straining the friendship - and the cat simply doesn't care.

I'm out of room on my page now - both sides.

I consider reaching for more paper. Hang on! What goes on? I am a freedom fighter in the war against the use of butcher's paper in academia - enough of this cunning subversion, I almost found myself mindmapping on physical paper and enjoying the learning experience. After a gentle chiding and a deep breath, I remind myself there are online tools for this. A fellow journeyer from a previous course is an ardent Prezi user. I always enjoyed her Prezi productions but quietly harboured a sneaking suspicion that needing to conceptualise ideas in such a way showed less than a scientific mind.

Right about now Prezi seems to be a great idea.

I'm off to see if I can concept map Kraiger's ideas from my scribbling to the Internets.

I'll report on my experiences later!


References

Kraiger, K. (2008). Transforming our models of learning and development: Web-based instruction as enabler of third-generation instruction. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1 (2008), 454–467.

Introductory Reading 1

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking teaching for the knowledge society

Diana Laurillard is Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Learning Technologies & Teaching, at the Open University in the United Kingdom.

"By taking a more professional approach to teaching, higher education institutions can exploit the new information technologies to meet the challenge of mass higher education and lifelong learning for the knowledge society." Educause abstract

Our knowledge society is creating more knowledge industries, which in turn offer their own sources of skills and knowledge - so what then is the value of a university education?

In the endnotes, the reading generically appropriates the term university as encompassing colleges, universities, and other traditional, nonprofit forms of higher education. In doing so, Laurillard (p. 18) claims that universities teach specialist knowledge but not practitioner knowledge required by knowledge industries and further suggests that such practitioner knowledge and the skill to develop it is otherwise currently served from the private sector.

I contend that publicly funded Vocational Employment Training (VET) colleges such as state Technical and Further Education (TAFE) colleges are primarily focused on the development of practitioner (as opposed to specialist) knowledge and the skills to develop it, and therefore the generalisation of post-secondary publicly-funded education in such a manner is not entirely accurate.

Laurillard (p. 18) highlights of how little value graduates find the knowledge gained in their university education once they enter their career, stating that the qualities of skills, attitudes and ways of thinking are not currently delivered by university curricula, and questions whether universities should engage with this issue or leave graduates to gain these qualities once they enter the knowledge industries.

As a lesser argument I suggest literature that portrays human development as a linear progression of 'secondary education > undergraduate studies > graduation > career' is widely missing the mark of life-long learning, as it continues to suggest that post-secondary education is the semi-exclusive domain of the so-called net generations. My experience of study in Bachelor of Science, and now in Master of Education, and as a TAFE lecturer for more than 20 years, is of a far greater number of mature adults in post-secondary education than net generation students. These older learners are typically attempting post-secondary education for the first time after first establishing a career, or are continuing to improve their skills and knowledge both in and out of the workplace within individual life-long learning progressions.

The reading proposes (p. 18) that universities have a competitive edge 'against' knowledge industries, and that this advantage will be maintained through maintaining core values (research-based teaching / addressing the long-term cognitive needs of students). However Laurillard immediately challenges her own proposition by suggesting a very different reality, in which universities believe they can protect their franchise from honest competition merely through the right to issue recognised qualifications. She later proposes (p. 20) that universities display an inbalance in attitude toward research and education, claiming that curriculum is not geared toward long-term high-level learning and skills.

Based on my experience of the Information & Communication Technology industry, I find some resonance with the author:

• that the skills and knowledge gained in undergraduate ICT programs have very little if any practical value in the workplace;
• more specifically, that specialist knowledge transmitted in undergraduate ICT programs is of little if any value in knowledge industries that require practitioner knowledge, and more importantly, the ability to acquire such knowledge; and
• that the marketability held by universities specifically in undergraduate ICT programs is that of unique qualification brand-acknowledgement.

What should be sounding the clarion for universities is the phenomenon over the past decade in which more students are abandoning university undergraduate ICT courses and opting to study TAFE qualifications, than are articulating from TAFE to university. Additionally, knowledge industry employers are increasingly sceptical of the true value of university ICT degrees, and are more attracted by vendor certification and higher VET qualifications.

Laurillard (p. 20) rightfully presupposes the need for "a very different kind of university teaching" in which students learn by doing, that the best teaching is typically more coaching than teaching, that students 'do not so much attend learning events' but rather live them. According to Laurillard,

Knowledge ... is not adequately represented as propositional statements but as a historicity that incorporates individuals' experiences, their perceptions of the immediate situation, their intentions, and their experiences of discovery, of recognised tensions, of uncertainties, of ambiguities still unresolved. This is not situated learning only, nor discovery learning, nor meta-learning. It comes closer to scholarship as learning (p. 20)

Why, then, is so much university academic delivery content text that has been digitised and uploaded for transmission for the purposes of mental regurgitation?

While I can recount an endless stream of TAFE colleagues who offer PowerPoint presentations or digitised versions of printed texts online and erroneoulsy believe they offer this new kind of teaching, it is also my experience that this new teaching does occur - probably more frequently - in the VET sector and that it offers new and very exciting outcomes.

The reading (p. 20) discusses the imperatives on universities - research success and wider participation in higher education - as opposing forces, as research is held in higher regard and therefore funded better, and education is not measured with any meaningful quality indicators. It has certainly been my experience in undergraduate and postgraduate studies that many lecturers conducting research openly view their student cohort as a nuisance and a distraction to their 'real' work - with some lecturers openly instructing classes to withdraw and not waste the lecturer's valuable effort if there is any risk of non-completion.

Laurillard (p. 20) states the need for a new breed of academics who are reflective practitioners not only in their research (which is the expected 'norm') but also in their teaching, professionals who are: 

1. fully trained through a [journeyman] program, giving them access to competence and personal engagement with the skills of scholarship in their field;
2. highly knowledgeable in some specialist area;
3. licensed to practice as both practitioner and mentor to others in the field;
4. building on the work of others in their field whenever they begin new work;
5. conducting practical work using the agreed-upon protocols and standards of evidence of their field;
6. working in collaborative teams of respected peers;
7. seeking new insights and ways of rethinking their field; and
8. disseminating findings for peer review and use by others. (p. 20-21)

Laurillard (p. 21) argues that none of these characteristics of the reflective practitioner are attributable to current university academics, and proposes that acadmics must become researchers in teaching to address this: "University teaching must aspire to a realignment of research and teaching and to teaching methods that support students in the generic skills of scholarship, not the mere acquisition of knowledge". I suggest that many (not all, but man) of my VET colleagues demonstrate many or all of these attributes - perhaps with the exception of the fourth and eight points.

The reading (p. 22) presents Laurillard's Conversational Framework as a more progressive education model than the transmission model, situating the framework within available digital technologies. Laurillard (p. 22-23) discusses reusable digital learning objects as an appropriate replacement to digitised text and PowerPoint presentations offered via the Internet - however she (p. 24) highlights that academia does not typically invent its tools, it adapts those invented by others to its own uses, and therefore academics require a collective R&D program that builds these learning objects.

Exhibiting shades of the prophetic, perhaps Laurillard's most telling comment (p. 25) is her closing statement that, "The digital age will find its own ways of managing without us".

Engage!

Welcome, and thanks for dropping by.

This blog is my learning journal for my studies in my Masters in Education at USQ. It is intended to capture my mutterings and musings and you're welcome to contribute, although I suspect this may be of interest only to others who are on a similar journey.

At the moment I am studying EDU5601 Designing for Flexible Learning Environments, which at this point requires a degree of navel gazing (ooh, lint ball!) and group pondering and reflection. It's the end of Week 2 and so it's a good time to compare where I am at with where I should be, and convince myself that we mustn't panic.

My challenge for the moment is the prepatory reading, it is time to read and reflect, read and reflect - in the words of a certain Captain, it is time to "Make it so."