Week 4: Trends & Issues in IDT

Part A: Chapters in Section V identify trends and issues in IDT in various contexts:

 

  1). Business & Industry

  2). Military

  3). Health Care Education

  4). Pk-12 Education

  5). Post-Secondary Education

 

            Select at least 3 of these 5 contexts and compare/contrast the IDT trends and issues. Then explain how they are similar or different from the IDT trends and issues in the context in which you work.

Context	Compare	Contrast
The Military & P-12 Education                   The Military & P-12 Education	Students are given tasks to practice and repeat which are spiraled throughout the curriculum to insure rote memorization and the ability to apply these skills sets on demand, automatically, and with little mental effort. Both use a collaborative approach to IDT, working in teams to come up with designs for learning and solutions. The military as well as P-12 education are both responsible for fashioning successful interactions with individuals from a multitude of diverse backgrounds, nationalities, and cultures; while overcoming different learning styles and language barriers. Both are tasked with deciding how to make use of new and emerging technologies with funding restrictions looming over them. Like most school districts the military is comprised of many branches and logistically, it can be challenging to configure and implement an IDT program which works well for everyone and takes into account all of their varying interests/needs. Compromises must be made in order to insure a successful roll-out. Each has a focus on development of life-long learners by creating cooperative, hands-on learning experiences for their trainees/students. Both are invested in the recruitment and retaining of quality personal, especially those who are highly trained, skilled individuals.	The military context is global in nature whereas P-12 education is, for the most part, locally operated and community based.   Within the military, it is next to impossible to “bend the rules” while much more latitude is given to IDT roles within P-12 education. The military must take into account within their design phase and allow for the fact that by the time many of these technologies are implemented in the field they will already be outdated.  Allowances must be made and in place to easily and effectively accommodate last minute changes in technology designs.   Military education context does not have the luxury of making mistakes or accommodating for margins of error on the battlefield.  Because lives are on the line, this necessitates the need for a rigorous, quality instructional design.  When mistakes do occur they are studied and corrected to the fullest possible degree for use in future instruction because ineffective instruction can lead to catastrophic consequences in combat.   While both utilize problem based learning approaches; the P-12 sector tends to focus more on drill and practice tutorial applications and even some COTS (Commercial Off-the-Shelf) game-based learning applications which are designed to help students visualize difficult concepts while also improving their engagement and critical thinking skills.   Much of the technology used within a military context is job specific.   While both rely mainly on external designers for IDT, the military must, on occasion, turn to “in-house” designers when matters of national security are involved.

  

Context	Compare	Contrast
Health Care & P-12 Education                                 Health Care & P-12 Education	Both are, for the most part, locally operated and community based. Students are given tasks to practice and repeat which are spiraled throughout the curriculum to insure rote memorization and the ability to apply these skills sets on demand, automatically, and with little mental effort. Working in teams, both use a collaborative approach to IDT in coming up with their designs for learning and solutions. Each has a focus on development of life-long learners by creating cooperative, hands-on learning experiences for their trainees/students. Problem-based learning (PBL) is seen as a relevant and effective learning technique in both contexts. The health care industry and P-12 education IDT’s are increasingly turning to social networking tools which allow their learners to work together outside of the classroom setting. The regulations and standards in place for the health care industry are similar to the standard student objectives found in P-12 education.  Both are used as a guide.  In education they serve as a boundary to direct instruction while trainers in the health care field follow their regulations to insure that they are providing the most purposeful and up-to-date training possible for their staff. Both rely primarily on external designers for IDT needs and requirements.	The health care industry has a plethora of donors and corporations involved in providing funding for educational research enabling them to spare no expense on the incorporation of additional and newer technologies than P-12 might be able to.   Health care education is a very varied and broad field encompassing not only hospitals and clinics but also many public, private, and non-profit organizations while P-12 has transitioned, over time, from observation, to basic information learning, to a more vigorous problem-based learning approach.   Health care education context does not have the luxury of making mistakes or accommodating for margins of error in their service industry.  Because lives are on the line, this necessitates the need for a rigorous, quality instructional design.  When mistakes do occur they are studied and corrected to the fullest possible degree for use in future instruction because ineffective instruction can lead to serious injury or even death.   Much of the technology used within the context of health care is job specific.   The health care context is comprised of three IDT phases which rely heavily on science, sensory perception, and innovation, they are the: ·         Prescientific Phase ·         Scientific Phase ·         Post-Flexner Phase Instructional design in the P-12 education system employs components found in the ADDIE model (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) for technology integration. The three types of ID development are: 1.  Systems – Integrated learning systems which is used to create computer-assisted instruction (CAI), includes instructional software. 2.  Product – Computer based learning instruction providing drill & practice and tutorials, also including the use of some COTS educational games designed to help students visualize difficult concepts while also improving their engagement and critical thinking skills. 3.  Classroom – Integrated technology in lessons reflecting educational standards which help to insure memorable & meaningful learning for all students.

Context	Compare	Contrast
Business, Industry & P-12 Education                 Business, Industry & P-12 Education	Both employ instructional designers which will, more often than not, work on a physical or virtual team incorporating a list of objectives to be accomplished; as well as, an instructional sequence to be followed to achieve/maintain projected goals and projects.   Each context has a set budget and time constraints which can play a key role in shaping IDT. Cross-cultural issues play a role within business & industry as well as a P-12 educational context.  In business, these issues help to establish corporate design based on societal and learner cultural factors.  Within education, these issues play a key role in shaping ELA instruction, specifically for ESL students.     Both demonstrate an ongoing need for employee training in the hopes of producing a more knowledgeable workforce with improved on-the-job performance.  In industry this equates to improved sales and profit margins while in education this is demonstrated through increased student performance on state mandated standardized tests.	The business & industry context is global in nature whereas P-12 education is, for the most part, locally operated and community based.   All districts which receive federal funds for technology implementation within the school, for use by both students and teachers alike, are legally bound by No Child Left Behind (NCLB) regulations.  In the private sector, businesses are under no such limitations.  The competitive nature of industry is what drives innovation within this field.   An instructional designer in the business world deals with technology-driven projects which, with a little luck and a lot of planning, may one day expand to fit a global market.   Compared to other U.S. business and industry sectors, P-12 education is experiencing a huge gap in their technology integration. Many companies are placing high school graduates into positions that they feel that they are not being properly prepared for.  These employers argue that these students are not being taught the skills they need to be successful in a 21st century work environment.    Many industries are finding it more cost effective to move out of the country or, at the very least, outsource some if not all of their labor costs abroad.  In P-12 education we do not have this luxury and every effort must be made by districts to spend tax-payer funds wisely and in an economical manner.

 

How are business & Industry, military, and health care education, similar or different from the IDT trends and issues in the context in which you work?

In my current assignment as a middle school teacher, I can see many similarities between military, health care, business & industry, and P-12 education.  In all of these context, students/learners, teachers, and even instructional designers are all faced with navigating rapidly evolving technologies.  As the You Tube video entitled “Did you know 2014: Shift Happens” points out:

“We are currently preparing our students for jobs that don’t yet exist… Using technologies that haven’t been invented, in order to solve problems we don’t even know are problems yet.”

Thank goodness there’s no pressure!  Cultural diversity issues also seem to be a recurring theme throughout each of these educational fields, from cross-cultural instructional interventions in business design to making allowances in our lesson design for the diversity of students within our classrooms, our nation attempts to “address global changes to ensure economic stability, international competitiveness, and the welfare of its citizens” across all of these contexts.

          In the health care sector they mention that lack of time is a major consideration when it comes to choosing and implementing educational technologies within their program.  Over the years, I have experienced the same time constraints within my instructional design and although in my case no lives are actually at risk, sometimes it seems like there are.  Every year I am given more and more material to cover with my students before the STAAR test with very little if anything ever being taken away.  With less time to actually instruct my curriculum, trying to integrate all of the technology tools at my disposal is difficult and I find myself having to pick and choose between them at the cost of omitting some quality educational technology.
 

Part B: Chapters in Section VI discuss global trends and issues in IDT. As the world’s population grows exponentially, we face unprecedented challenges that have implications for learning. How and can we prepare our youth to address the problems of living in a world with 9 billion people when the earth’s resources cannot sustain that many? Does our current education system, curriculum, and instructional practices help learners foster the complex problem-solving skills necessary to tackle these issues? Are there methods and practices used in European and Asian countries that we should use here in the US? Why or why not?

 

             With the world’s population increasing at an alarming rate and the Earth’s resources being used at a staggering pace with no visible end in sight, we must prepare our youth to face these challenges creatively, armed with problem solving abilities which can be tailored to practically any setting.  Our current teaching models will not adequately prepare our youth to tackle this sustainability issue, but awareness of the problem is the first step to solving it.  To this end; we need to create a more hands-on, problem-based learning approach to instruction.  The days of the “sit-and-get,” lecture formatted, teacher centered instruction are over.  Our students need to be challenged, to get acquainted with current technologies increasing their overall effective technology literacy, and to work collaboratively to solve real-world problems and develop socially.  Beginning this process within the confines of the classroom, provides them a safe haven in which to observe, practice, and develop their skills, honing them for the day in which they join the work force with the necessary tools to be confident in their abilities as well as successful in their future careers.  Our survival as a species and the future of our planet are at stake, we have to get this one right.  Just like in health care services, lives are on the line and we don’t have the luxury of margin of error.          

 

Are there methods and practices used in European and Asian countries that we should use here in the US? Why or why not? 

The answer to this question is of course a resounding yes!  For instance, Germany’s innovative I-VET or Initial Vocational Education and Training model is an exceptional way to give their students exposure to real-world problems by having them apprentice 1 day out of every week, 20% of their instructional time, with a company of their choosing over a period of anywhere from 2 to 3½ years.  This hands-on, problem-based learning approach not provides them with practical experience but could also quite possibly lead to employment after graduation.  Although the text did not mention a grade level for this dual-system program, I would assume that it would be introduced either towards the end of middle school or the beginning of high school. 

           Across the globe in Japan, in April of 2009, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, or MEXT for short, introduced an initiative called the “School New Deal Plan” which is focused on increasing the use of information communication technologies (ICT) in school across the country.  This initiative is aimed at increasing their student’s scientific understanding of information, their skills in utilizing this information, while instilling a “participatory attitude” towards today’s information society.  They have introduced an “Integrated Study” curriculum for grades 3-12 while also advocating an “active learning” approach to instruction for their universities, as well as, grades K-12.  These programs are intended to promote and foster some of the 21^st century skills these students will need in order to successfully navigate the global sea of unrest in these uncertain times.  The students are not the only focus of this initiative; current teachers in Japan are also being given opportunities by the government to attend training seminars in basic ICT-related skills and enhanced instructional models while those seeking certification are now required to take a two-credit hour course in “ICT basics” to receive their licensing. 

Two heads are better than one, three are better than two, and so on….  Just imagine the progress we can make in helping to manage some of the world’s most pressing issues by working together globally, the possibilities are simply endless; but then again, so are the consequences if we fail to act in time.     
 

Addendum:

           

Just yesterday I read an article which I thought should be included in this post even though it isn’t specifically aimed at a discussion of IDT.  But, in order to accomplish what they did, there had to be an enormous amount of instructional design and technology going on in the background in order to achieve this level of success.  The piece by Dominique Mosbergen was called Chinese Province Larger Than Texas Just Ran For An Entire Week On Only Renewable Energy and, like the title suggests, it’s an article about meeting the energy needs of the Qinghai province of China, population 5.8 million people, by using nothing but wind, solar, and hydroelectric power.  The results of this government sponsored “Fossil Fuel-Free Week” initiative are impressive even before you take into account that China is the number one contributor of global CO₂ emissions.  They are single-handedly responsible for nearly one-third of the world’s total annual CO₂ emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and cement manufacturing at a staggering 10,641,789 kt of CO₂ per year.  In response to this crisis, China is positioning itself to become a global leader of green energy with plans to dedicate $360 billion to renewable energy infrastructures by the year 2020 which will drastically reduce its reliance on coal consumption and exceed their nation’s commitment to clean energy development, as stated and agreed upon, in the Paris climate agreement.  Although I’m not certain this is exactly what you had in mind when you asked us to discuss if there are any “methods and practices used in European and Asian countries that we should use here in the US,” I believe this model of efficiency should be strongly considered, researched, and modeled here in the United States who is by the way the number two contributor of annual global CO₂ emissions at a whopping 5,172,338 kt of CO₂ per year.         

REFERENCES:

Dempsey, J.V., & Reiser, R. A. (2012). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.  

 

Mosbergen, Dominique. (2017, June 29). Chinese Province Larger Than Texas Just Ran For AN Entire Week On Only Renewable Energy. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/qinghai-china-renewables-week_us_5954d053e4b02734df3020c7

Pan, Anna. Did you Know 2014: Shift Happens. Dreamer Film Productions, [Video file] Retrieved June 27, 2017 from http://www.youtube.com