December 25, 2011

Reflections


Reflection

Over the years, I have put considerable thought into how learning and language develop and continue to find it an intriguing subject. It was a surprise to discover all the learning theories have been developed since my undergraduate studies in the early 1970’s. According to Knapp  (2007), learning is not one thing.  “Each _ism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in there own right” (Kerr, 2007). The many layers and functions involved in learning explain the diversity in learning theories. Each learning theory has relevance since no one theory explains all of the learning process. By analyzing and synthesizing the various tenets of the theories, it is possible to comprehend more of how learning occurs.

This course has deepened my understanding of my personal learning process. Gilbert & Swaner (2008) quote Dunn and Perrin’s (1994) view of learning styles as “the way in which each learner begins to concentrate on, process, and retain new and difficult information” (p. 2).  After studying the learning theories, I find I still process new information the same way I did when I began this course. Visual and kinesthetic modes are still my. Associating new content with information already known has been the way I learn and the way I have taught students. While my preferred learning styles and information processing have not changed, I have acquired the cognitive scaffolding to evaluate how I learn from a more expansive perspective.

My personal learning process is explained by two theories that were new to me, Constructivism and Connectivism. Constructivist theorists view knowledge “as not being imposed from outside people but rather formed inside them” and assume learners must actively construct knowledge for themselves (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2008, pp. 184). In constructivism learners actively internalize, modify, and construct meaning (Ponticell, 2006). According to Siemens,

Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired and the ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. Also critical is the ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday (Siemens, 2005, para. 24).

Although I realized learning occurred through social interaction, I never considered it a major factor in learning, nor realized how much of my learning involves networks. In fact,  networks have changed the way I obtain knowledge.

Adult learning theory also explains my personal learning. Conlan, Grabowski, and Smith, (2003) posit that adults learn best through four types of learning experiences:  Action Learning, Experiential Learning, Problem Based Learning, and Self Directed Learning. According to Knowles in his Theory of Andragogy, learning occurs for adults: (1) when they are involved in planning and evaluating; (2) when they use experience as a basis for learning activities; (3) when subjects are relevant to their life, and (4) when learning experiences are problem-centered (Conlan et al., 2003).

There is a strong connection between learning theories, learning styles, educational technology, and motivation “A learning theory explains underlying the psychological processes that influence learning,” and “usually includes a set of assumptions about key aspects of the learning process that can be used to generate hypotheses which can then be tested empirically” (Arturo, 2011, para. 1). Learning theories answer the following questions:

(1) How does learning occur?

(2) What factors influence learning?

(3) What is the role of memory?

(4) How does transfer occur? And

(5) What types of learning are best explained by the theory? (Ertmer and Newby, 1993, p. 53)

Each learning theory has it’s own merits, and is valuable for not only understanding how learning occurs, but for designing learning experiences. “As people acquire more experience with a given content, they progress along a low-to–high continuum” (Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 67). The progression is from (1) behaviorist theory: knowing what, rules, facts, and operations; to (2) cognitivist theory: knowing how, extrapolating from “general rules to sspecific cases;” to (3) constructivism: tasks demanding high levels of processing, advanced knowledge acquisition, “constructing knowledge and meaning from experience and collaboration” (Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 62, 67).

Learning style refers to a learner’s preference that “differ[s] in regard to what mode of instruction or study is most effective for them” (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork, 2008, p. 105). To learn effectively, the learner has to want to learn (Ormrod, n.d.); a learner has to be motivated. Motivation, whether intrinsic or extrinsic  is complex; learners have different amounts of motivation and different types of motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The type of motivation depends on “the underlying attitudes and goals that give rise to action—that is, it concerns the why of actions” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 54). Differing learning styles and motivational needs should be considered when designing instruction. Offering multiple methods to convey content can enhance learning. Also using educational technology offers a variety of ways. In reference to Connectivism, learning takes place “at the intersection of prior knowledge, experience, perception, reality, comprehension, and flexibility” (Davis, Edmonds, Kelly-Bateman, 2008).  Likewise, designing effective instruction involves the intersection of learning theories, learning styles, educational technology, and motivation.

As we come to the close of this course, my greatest surprise is how much I am learning after being out of school for almost 40 years. Since biological changes that accompany aging decrease memory (Cercone, 2008), I was anxious as to whether it would be possible to pass a course. Previously, my education was in traditional, passive classrooms (Cercone, 2008) and involved predominantly rote learning for objective tests. Much of that learning was lost after exams because it was never integrated, synthesized, and applied to real world situations. The learning strategies involved in online classes have opened a whole new world of learning possibilities. It feels as if a part of me has come to life again with the mental stimulation that learning new content provides. This has made learning about learning even more relevant. Each learning theory provides valuable insight into how learning occurs and how it occurs somewhat differently in individuals and at various ages. Not only the learning theories we have studied, but the instructional techniques incorporated into Walden’s online classrooms will play a crucial role in all instruction I design in the future.

References

Arturo, Anthony. (2011, November 5). A note of caution. [Disussion group comment]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=6051995&Survey=1&47=10484268&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. AACE Journal, 16(2), 137-159.

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., and Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning in M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 29 Nov. 2011 from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning

Gilbert, J., & Swanier, C. (2008). Learning styles: How do they fluctuate? Institute for Learning Styles Journal [Vol. l]. Retrieved from http://www.auburn.edu/~witteje/ilsrj/Journal%20Volumes/Fall%202008%20Volume%201%20PDFs/Learning%20Styles%20How%20do%20They%20Fluctuate.pdf

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Connectivism

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 59-71. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2) Out and About: Discussion on Educational Schools of Thought Retrieved from Kaplaneduneering website: http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker. [Blog message]. Retrieved from  http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2008).  Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition).  New Jersey, NY: Pearson.

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: concepts and evidence. Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 9 (3), 103-119.

Ponticell, J. (2006). Theories of learning. Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration. Sage Publications. Retrieved 22 Nov. 2011, from http:/sage-reference.com/view/leadership/n338.xml

Ryan, R. M. & Deci. E. L., (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Retrieved from http://mmrg.pbworks.com/f/Ryan,+Deci+00.pdf

Siemens, G. (2005, Jan). Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

Posted by on December 25, 2011 in Instructional design.

Leave a Comment

December 18, 2011

Fitting the Pieces Together


Fitting the Pieces Together

Learning takes place “at the intersection of prior knowledge, experience, perception, reality, comprehension, and flexibility” (Davis, Edmonds, Kelly-Bateman, 2008). Perhaps understanding how learning occurs involves the intersection of learning theories. Learning is not one thing (Knapp, 2007).  No one theory explains all of the learning process. “Each _ism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in there own right” (Kerr, 2007). The many layers and functions involved in learning explain the diversity in learning theories, and in considering the various tenets of the theories as layers, it is possible to comprehend more of how one learns. Each has it’s own merits.

As my course on learning theories concludes, I find I still learn the same way I did when I started. Visual and kinesthetic modes are still my preference and tasks involving auditory memory and auditory sequential memory remain difficult. “I learn best when I can take new learning and apply it to something that I already understand and then put it into practice” (Brubaker, 2011).   Associating new information with something I already understand is still very effective.  While the preferred learning styles and the way I process information has not changed, I have acquired the cognitive scaffolding to evaluate how I learn from a more expansive perspective. Each learning theory has relevance.

According to Standridge (2001), behaviorism focuses on observable and measurable facets of behavior and changes in behavior from stimulus-response associations. Behaviorism uses reinforcement to encourage desired behavior (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009).  Ertmer and Newby (1993) explain behaviorism works well for learning facts and rules and the “knowing what” aspects of learning. I think behaviorist principles of reinforcement can influence learning at higher levels. Completing an assignment well and earning a grade that indicates indicative of that serves as a reinforcement and motivation for me.

Cognitivist theories view learning as information processing (Ormrod et al, 2090). Learning is the result of “information stored in the memory in an organized, meaningful manner” (Ertmer & Newby 1993, p.59). Although tenets of information processing apply to simple forms of learning, they are even more relevant in complex learning functions (Ormrod et al, 2009). Cognitivist theories also describe concept learning, problem solving, transfer, memory structures, self-regulation, and learning strategies (Ormrod et al, 2009). The cognitivist theories make sense to me and I find them very useful in teaching children with learning disabilities as well as understanding my own learning.

Constructivism, connectivism, and social learning theories involve active learning, engagement, and collaboration. These I found the most interesting because they involve aspects of learning I had never considered before. Initially, I thought I was more comfortable with conventional methods of learning. Upon reflection I am not sure how I would have defined conventional methods. Perhaps it was face-to-face classrooms, lectures, and rote learning to pass objective tests. However, I find that I am more comfortable and more productive in constructivist learning situations and online classrooms.

Adult learning theories may explain the reasons behind my preference.  Conlan, Grabowski, and Smith, (2003) posit that adult learn best through four types of learning experiences:  Action Learning, Experiential Learning, Problem Based Learning, and Self Directed Learning.According to Knowles in his Theory of Andragogy, learning occurs for adults: (1) when they are involved in planning and evaluating; (2) when use experience as a basis for learning activities; (3) when subjects are relevant to their life, and (4) when learning experiences are problem-centered (Conlan et al., 2003).

According to Prensky, I am a “digital immigrant” since I was born prior to the digital age and later ‘immigrated’ to technology (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). Although a “digital immigrant,” technology is central to my learning. To facilitate learning I currently use computer for online classes, tutorials, research, and reading. Various editing and design software serve as learning experiences as I use them for projects. Email, social networks, blogs, and texting, either on the computer or iPhone also facilitates social learning. The abundance of information readily available makes the internet my resource for answers to questions and instructions on procedures. Online tutorials and courses have become the main way I learn formally. Informal learning is now a significant aspect my learning experience through social networks, friends, family, and colleagues, and most of that is through digital venues.

References

Brubaker, Jennifer. (2011, November 1). I learn when I can… [Disussion group comment]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=6051995&Survey=1&47=10484268&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Connectivism

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 59-71. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2) Out and About: Discussion on Educational Schools of Thought Retrieved from Kaplaneduneering website: http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker. [Blog message]. Retrieved from  http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Laureate Education, Inc. (2009). The timeline of history of learning. Retrieved from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/Walden/EDUC/61

Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2008).  Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition).  New Jersey, NY: Pearson.

Standridge, M. (2002). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Behaviorism

Posted by on December 18, 2011 in Adult education, Information Processing, Learning Theory and tagged , , , , .

Leave a Comment

December 4, 2011

Network Connections Facilitate Learning


“Connectivism presents a model of learning that acknowledges the tectonic shifts in society where learning is no longer an internal, individualistic activity” (Siemens, 2004, para. 40). Siemens posits, “the pipe is more important than the content within the pipe,” so the ability to learn what is needed for the future is more important than what needs to be known today (2004, para. 39). In a digital environment, when new knowledge is needed, the ability to connect sources that provide that knowledge becomes an essential skill (Siemens, 2004). “As knowledge continues to grow and evolve, access to what is needed is more important than what the learner currently possesses” (Siemens, 2004, para. 39).

Technology has altered communication, occupations, entertainment, and learning. “Experience has long been considered the best teacher of knowledge. Since we cannot experience everything, other people’s experiences, and hence other people, become the surrogate for knowledge” (Stephenson, 2004, para.3). Siemens states:

Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical. (2004, para. 23).

Networks have become essential since one cannot learn everything by their own experience. According to Siemens (2004), networks are connections between entities. “Computer networks, power grids, and social networks all function on the simple principle that people, groups, systems, nodes, entities can be connected to create an integrated whole” (Siemens, 2004, para.19). According to Siemens, “an individual’s knowledge is comprised of a network, which feeds into organizations and institutions, which in turn feed back into the network, and then continue to provide learning to individual. This cycle of knowledge development allows learners to remain current in their field through the connections they have formed” (2004, para.28).

How has my network changed the way I learn?

My networks have changed the way I obtain knowledge, but I  suspect I process information in relatively the same manner that I have for the last six decades. It is difficult to get my head around the connectivist concept that learning resides outside the individual. Siemens explains learning as a “process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing (2004, para. 22). The abundance of information available “requires that we offload our cognitive capacity onto a network of people and technology our networks are incredibly rich now, whether it’s a mobile phone, whether it’s a computer, whether it’s access to a database, but we’re seeing a significant explosion in how we start to connect with other people but also how we connect with data sources.

It is obvious that there are information sets, databases, and an abundance of knowledge that exists outside of any individual. If collective learning resides outside an individual, can it actually be a part of that individual’s declarative, procedural, or conditional knowledge?

Digital Tools Facilitate Learning  

Digital tools are essential today. The abundance of information available “requires that we offload our cognitive capacity onto a network of people and technology our networks are incredibly rich now, whether it’s a mobile phone, whether it’s a computer, whether it’s access to a database, but we’re seeing a significant explosion in how we start to connect with other people but also how we connect with data sources” (Siemens, G., n.d., para. 4). To facilitate learning I currently use computer for online classes, tutorials, research, and reading. Various editing and design software serve as learning experiences as I used them for projects. Email, social networks, blogs, and texting, either on the computer or iPhone also facilitate social learning.

Gain New Knowledge

According to Prensky, I am a “digital immigrant” since I was born prior to the digital age and later ‘immigrated’ to technology (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). Technology has presented challenges, but having “immigrated,” the internet is my resource for answers to questions and instructions on procedures. Online tutorials and courses have become the main way I learn formally. Informal learning is now a significant aspect my learning experience through social networks, friends, family, and colleagues, and most of that is through digital venues.

Personal Learning Network and the Central Tenets of Connectivism

Reflecting on the mind map of my personal learning network, I see that I have adopted several new methods of learning over the past five years.  According to Siemens, “Connectivism is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories” (Siemens, 2004, para. 22). Siemens lists the principle of connectivism as:

• Knowledge rests in diversity of opinions

• Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources

• Learning may reside in non-human appliances

• Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known.

• Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning

• Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill

• Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist-learning activities (2004, para. 24).

In looking at my mind map and reflecting on the tenets of connectivism, I see that I gain knowledge from a diversity of opinions. I agree with Siemens that the capacity to learn is more critical than what is currently known, that it is important to nurture and maintain connections for continual learning, and that the ability to see connections between ideas and concepts is a core skill. While accurate, up-to-date knowledge may be Siemens intent for all connectivist –learning activites, but just because the information is available as part of a network does not guarantee that it is accurate or up to date. Siemens posits “learning may reside in non-human appliances” (2004, para. 24).  In my “digital immigrant” opinion, non-human appliances may store information, but that information is not “learned” until it is process inside a human mind.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (2009). The timeline of history of learning. Retrieved from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/Walden/EDUC/61

Siemens, G. (n.d.). Constructivism [Video Podcast]. (n.d.) Laureate Education.

Siemens, G. (2004, December  12). Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace – everything elearning website. Retrieved from  http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Stephenson, K. (2004, December 10). What Knowledge Tears Apart, Networks Make Whole, 36. Retrieved from http://www.netform.com/html/icf.pdf

Posted by on December 4, 2011 in Connectivism, Instructional design, Learning Theory.

Leave a Comment

December 2, 2011

Connectivism


Posted by on December 2, 2011 in Information Processing, Learning Theory.

Leave a Comment

November 14, 2011

The Brain, Learning, and Information Processing


“Understanding how people learn is a foundation for designing effective instruction” (Ormrod, 2011b).  Neuropsychology can help the instructional designer understand how the brain processes information and that relates to cognitive theories of learning (Ormrod, 2011a). Two resources that I found helpful this week are “Learning with Videos vs. Learning with Print” and “Understanding How the Brain Learns”.

Learning with Videos vs. Learning with Print: The Role of Interactive Features

The article, “Learning with Videos vs. Learning with Print: The Role of Interactive Features”, by Martin Merkt, Sonja Weigand, Anke Heier, and Stephan Schwan provides an interesting study on the effectiveness of video for classroom instruction. Since the use of video for learning purposes has been disputed, the author designed research trials to compare digital video, enhanced digital vide,o and an illustrated textbook and their effect on learning. Previous research that found:

“Whereas for children (that assumedly lack reading proficiency) and low complex material (for example, children’s news), retention and understanding were equal or even in favor of videos (Furnham, de Siena, & Gunter, 2002; Walma van der Molen & van der Voort, 1997, 2000), for adolescent or adult viewers and complex matters, several studies repeatedly found videos to be inferior to print when it came to recalling the facts mentioned in the medium – even when presentation time was held constant over the different conditions”( Merkt, Weigand, Heier, & Schwan, 2011, p. 688).

The authors posit the amount of control the learner has over information processing is a possible reason for these differences. Readers tend to adjust their pace to meet their own information processing needs (Merkt et al, 2011).  Effective readers also back track and reread passages and use organizers such as tables of contents, titles, and subtitles to aid memory (Merkt et al, 2011). However the

“transitory nature of films leads to additional difficulties that print does not present. Transient information needs to be continuously processed in the working memory. Because the recipients’ cognitive resources in the working memory are limited (Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Paas, 1998), transient information can result in a cognitive overload if there is a mismatch of the presentation pace and the recipients’ cognitive capacities” (Merkt et al, 2011, p. 691). To avoid this learners can be given control with stop and play buttons. “Giving recipients the opportunity to control pacing of information interactively any time they feel the need might be a promising approach to improve video’s potential as a learning tool” (Merkt et al, 2011, p. 691).

The result of their studies show that “interactive videos are just as effective as print when it comes to learning” (Merkt et al, 2011, p. 701). The interactive features, stop and play buttons, even out the learning potential between video and print (Merkt et al, 2011).  Instructional designers can effectively use videos to provide active and self-regulated learning of content, but should include interactive features to allow learners to control their pace.

Read the entire article : http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/science/article/pii/S0959475211000247

Understanding How the Brain Learns

NICHCY.org, is an informative site presented by the National Dissemination Center for Children with Learning Disabilities. One section provides information on “Effective Practices in the Classroom and School”. Under the subcategory of “Basics of Teaching and Learning” is a link to excellent posts and links on “Understanding How the Brain Learns”. I think you will find these linked articles worth reading for information on the brain and how it functions. They are well written with colorful, clear illustrations.

As intriguing as these articles are, for the instructional designer they provide limited information for designing learning experiences that can be practically applied beyond an excellent understanding of how the brain functions in learning.

One fact relevant to instructional design is that “about one fourth of the brain is involved in visual processing, more than any other sense” (Society for Neuroscience, 2011). Engaging one fourth of the brain should help learners focus more attention on content. “Attention is a necessary prerequisite of learning” (Ormrod,  Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p.56). “Comprehension suffers when students do not pay adequate attention” (Ormrod et al, 2009, p.58). Ormrod (2011) also says people have an amazing capacity to remember what they see. Instructional designers can use graphics and visual aids as a highly effective way to help learners remember information. Learners encode information by storing in in different formats. Material encoded in more than one format will be remembered better. Instructional designers can present content so that learner can see a visual representation while listening to an explanation.

References

Merkt, M., Weigand, S., Heier, A., Schwa, S. (2011, March 29). Learning with videos vs. learning with print: The role of interactive features. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 687-704. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.03.004

Ormrod, J. (2011a). Information processing and the brain. [Video podcast]. Los Angeles: Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com

Ormrod, J. (2011b). An Introduction to learning. [Video podcast]. Los Angeles: Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com

Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition). New York: Pearson.

Society for Neuroscience.  (2011).  Neuroscience core concepts: the essential principles of neuroscience. Retrieved from  http://www.sfn.org/siteobjects/published/0000BDF20016F63800FD712C30FA42DD/F8B42DDD1FEC25AA4766675596AE53B2/file/SfN%20Neuroscience%20Core%20Concepts2.pdf

Posted by on November 14, 2011 in Information Processing, Instructional design.

2 Comments

November 7, 2011

The Doorway to Professional Learning Communities


Welcome to my blog! This my first experience with blogging and I am excited at the potential of learning through interaction with other instructional design students and professionals. “Thousands of accomplished educators are now writing blogs about teaching and learning, bringing transparency to both the art and the science of their practice. In every content area and grade level and in schools of varying sizes and from different geographic locations, educators are actively reflecting on instruction, challenging assumptions, questioning policies, offering advice, designing solutions, and learning together (Ferriter, 2009, p. 35). What a wealth of knowledge! As I have just begun to skim the surface, I found three resources that stand out as a challenge and enhancement the thinking instructional designers.

Creative Agni

Creative Agni: an E-zine for Instructional Design and E-learning, by Shafali Anand provides posts to ignite creativity and to make courses and programs instructionally effective. The site is divided into several sections a very practical section provides posts to help the reader understand the character and soul of e-learning. A second section contains interesting posts for “instructional designers who like to analyze and synthesize, and who are creative in a logical way (Anand, 2011). This resource introduces concepts and closes questions for readers to answer by integrating their thoughts on the concept with past experience. Another sections uses fiction to teach instructional design concepts section by presenting stories based in India. The reader has to reflect on the stories to grasp the instructional design concept within.

Experiencing E-Learning

Experiencing E-Learning by Christy Tucker is a blog about constructing engaging learning e-learning experiences through instructional design. Christy Tucker  writes about instructional design, corporate e-learning, K-12 education, life long learning, and technology. One very helpful feature she provides is a weekly bookmark on posts she has found interesting or helpful.

Focus on Adult Learning … Innovation through Inquiry

This site discusses issues in adult professional education. Holly McCracken who is currently a faculty member at Capella University edits the blog. McCracken’s “research interests include adult, experiential and transformative learning, adult literacy, academic outreach and workforce education, organizational psychology, and instructional technologies” (McCracken, 2011). The site provides a broad range posts on teaching and learning with adults. This resource function as a network for relevant news. Posts are formatted as a synopsis of articles with links to the full article.

You will find these sites were instructive and insightful. They are challenging and motivating. Each provides meaningful conversations about learning, instructional design, and current news related to education.  I think you will each site will serve as an on going resource providing creative ideas and multiple opportunities to learn.

References

Ferriter, B. (2009). Learning with blogs and wikis. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 34–38.

Anand, Shafali . (2011). The Instructional Designer’s Evolution through Analytical Learning: The IDEAL  [Blog message]. Retrieved from http://creativeagni.com/ezine/the-instructional-designers-evolution-through-analytical-learning/

McCracken, Holly. (2011). About Holly McCracken. [Blog message]. Retrieved from http://hollymccracken.wordpress.com/meet-the-blogger-holly-mccracken/ 

Posted by on November 7, 2011 in Adult education, Instructional design.

Leave a Comment