Skip to main content

ISD and Gatekeeping

 In reading these chapters together it was difficult to separate the topic of the first from my read of the second. Though I think both topics need to be looked at individually, I also thought that the way chapter 5 impacted my reading of chapter 6 was interesting to consider. In large part because the way that Molenda described ISD and made a case for it I was extremely put off by. The explanation Molenda provided in the history and purpose of ISD as having its "first root ... in the US military" and that the resultant idea stemmed from looking at a problem as a deconstruction of process starting at the end result and moving backward while trying to use the entirety of a situation to develop the system that will accomplish the end result. When it is a person developing or acquiring skills through this method this is what Molenda identifies as "the systems approach." I intentionally site the result of the "systems approach" as a method to successfully design a system for a person to develop or acquire skills because I do not feel that claiming that what is happening in this system is learning.

Because I come at life and my occupation from a perspective of wanting a world where everyone is trying to do their education work from a place of authenticity in conversation with skill, and because I am primarily from a background that is about teaching children, helping adults find relevant and reliable information to their particular circumstance, and assisting instructors navigate skills in a new environment to accomplish a task have spent significant time internalizing - my professional passion tends to lean toward a melding with my personal passion for learning experiences that are authenticity driven and that champion self-determination.

However, I am also deeply trained in the ideology of following a prescribed set of rules and expectations for the purpose of acquiring skills to fulfill a set end destination. These are tension points in my own grappling with this topic, because it is difficult for me not to see ISD as Molenda describes it as a way to implement instructional design in ways that prioritize skill acquisition - learning that is responsive based on asserting that the end goal is everything and achieving it is the highest accomplishment of the system that is performing its function for the student in delivering that 'success' VS a system that is designed to champion a learner who is being taught to think and reflect and internalize what a topic and or learning experience is, means to them.

I realize that both methods are necessary in our current economy, and how people must 'earn a living' and exist in the structures (everyday life in the modern age) that currently exist. So it was with reluctance, but increasing respect for his work in including both of these things that I read Branch's essays in Chapter 6. 

Initially it seemed like Branch was just expanding on a mentality aligned with ISD in the more surface skimming of it that Molenda (and their rejoinder from Argondizza) covered it. But seeing myself in Rieber's response - I was more open to admitting that Branch made some crucial distinction and points using ISD language, but ultimately not actually supporting the version of ISD it seemed Molenda was. I base this on how Branch talks about complexity and identifies that (what I would dub a 'responsible' learning system) pays attention to when it is 'most needed' and when it is not (p.50).

While Branch is certainly taking a gate-keeper approach to instructional design and what constitutes and instructional designer, and in a tone that is quite blunt, I appreciate that within that bluntness he is able to make a lot of space for, once someone has been established as an instructional designer, that person to be functioning with a lot of freedom and responsibility to grapple with and create and design based on a mentality that is flexible, inclusively expansive, and is mindful that ISD is not an answer, it is merely a tool with strengths and weaknesses in application at every stage.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Screen Capture and Record Showcase

The video below is meant as a basic tour of the gradebook in Elearning for new TAs or TAs who need a review. It's intent is to supplement an larger Elearning course meant to facilitate TA's as a reference and guide for how to grade a course, the different tools they have access to, and when to seek outside help. The video takes TAs through the basic layout of the gradebook, and toggles between the two crucial screens in gradebook management. It mentions some of the symbols used in Elearning to make grading more convenient, and refers TAs to the screenshot embedded on this page. The screenshot below was developed with the intent to supplement the above demo tour through the gradebook in Elearning. It illustrates symbols that are referenced in the demo and details further how they can be of use to the TA grading tasks. Assignment:  For your Screencast video: Come up with a fairly basic (I’ll let you judge) computer-based task that you would want to demonstrate as part of a less...

Transcending Content

In my comment last week I was trying to suss out what the 'stakes' of instructional design were, if the argument is that design is a need and not a privilege, and also that design is a need. In this weeks reading I appreciated that it more clearly focused on what those stakes could be through the lens of what instructional design could bring to the table in terms of educational design.   Wilson introduces the term 'principled resistance' as a response to "certain ideas that are seen as negatively impacting the profession" (p 27). And while I think the way he qualifies heavily by using the 'certain' and the 'seem' padding in his statement (illustrating what he later cops being what he terms a 'limited radical') I appreciated his use of the term for the way it makes space and acknowledges that radicalism is not synonymous with a lack of intention or that it is simply an act of unstructured rebellion. I also appreciated Martin's cautio...

In Which Corporate Optimization Becomes Human Brain Innovation and the Patriarchy Lives On

 In the opening paragraph of chapter 15 Marker says the majority of businesses - who have been allowed to become the dominant institutions of our time - are so focused on profit that it "contributes to adverse social and environmental outcomes that outstrip our biological, psychological, and even spiritual abilities." (Marker, 117) Initially I read this as Marker criticizing the system that vaunts business in this way, the one he calls out for "making profit the ultimate measure of success." However, upon closer read it feels unsettlingly like rather than having an interest in changing the system, Marker is making a case for the way neurobiology can improve the methods of HPI to operationalize human behavior to match the tasks of profit better and also wouldn't it be nice if along the way businesses took on a more moral - here defined as taking into their method of profit methods of diversifying the industry in ways that allow business at large to continue into ...