On my hunt for key “do’s” and “don’ts” of job interviews I decided to look at infographics. Gallaher, et al. expanded on the usefulness of infographics for online learning. They found the dual-coding and chunking nature of infographics aided comprehension and retention of summarized information (Gallaher, et al., 2017). I assumed interview tips would be a perfect topic for quickly absorbing infographic information and I was not disappointed.

Infographic Reviews

34 Crucial Job Interview Tips The first infographic I found attractive and helpful was posted by CollegeAtlas.org in 2015 titled, 34 Crucial Job Interview Tips. The focus is solidly on body language and clothing choice. Their statistics weigh in the favor of dressing conservatively, having good confident posture, smiling and making eye contact. They suggest you don’t dress flamboyantly, fidget, or cross your arms over your chest (College Atlas, 2015).	View the 34 Crucial Job Interview Tips Infographic
The Dos and Don’ts of Interviews The website, Reception Desk posted their own 20 top tips titled, The Dos and Don’ts of Interviews. They mention some of the same information regarding dress and posture. However, they also expand on researching the company, arriving on time, and preparing questions and examples. They warn not to talk bad about your current job, lie about your skills, or ask about the salary (Reception Desk, 2017).	View The Dos And Don’ts Of Interviews Infographic
7 Things Not to Say During a Job Interview Another infographic I found concentrated on phrases that should not be stated during an interview. AG Careers.com composed Kathryn Elizabeth Tuggle’s advice from FOXBusiness into Don’t Say and Instead, Say columns on their infographic titled, 7 Things Not to Say During a Job Interview. Most of the things to avoid concern personal life such as emotional stories, health issues, and problems with previous jobs. They suggest if offering compliments or commonalities they are sincere and not forced (Tuggle, n.d.).	View the 7 Things Not To Say During a Job Interview Infographic
The Introvert’s Guide to a Confident Job Interview One of the most useful infographics I found was Youtern’s The Introvert’s Guide to a Confident Job Interview [Infographic]. In their interview toolkit for introverts, they break down their tips into three sections: before, during, and after. Each section provides advice to individuals who shy away from social interactions. The “before” tips include mapping out where the interview will take place and perhaps taking a practice trip. A “during” tip suggests thinking of talking about oneself as sharing what one can bring to the job rather than bragging about oneself. Another “during” tip gives suggestions on how to refocus if concentration has been lost. The “after” tips suggest thanking the interview panel for something specific such as what you appreciated about the process (YouTern, 2017).	View the Introvert’s Guide to Job Interviews Infographic

References

College Atlas. (2015, June 2). 34 crucial job interview tips. Retrieved from CollegeAtlas.org: https://www.collegeatlas.org/34-crucial-job-interview-tips.html

Gallaher, S. E., O’Dulain, M., O’Mahony, N., Kehoe, C., McCarthy, F., & Morgan, G. (2017). Instructor-provided summary infogrphics to support online learning. Educational Media International, 54(2), 129-147. doi:10.1080/09523987.2017.1362795

Reception Desk. (2017, March 9). The dos and don’ts of job interviews (infographic). Retrieved from Reception Desks: http://www.receptiondesksonline.co.uk/the-dos-and-donts-of-job-interviews-infographic/

Tuggle, K. E. (n.d.). 7 things not to say during a job interview. Retrieved from AG Careers: https://www.agcareers.com/infographics/7-things-not-to-say-during-a-job-interview-infographic-11.cfm

YouTern. (2017, January 30). The introvert’s guide to a confident job interview [infographic]. Retrieved from YouTern: https://www.youtern.com/thesavvyintern/index.php/2017/01/30/guide-confident-job-interview-infographic/

So far, my work on developing a fully-online template design for the EDUC 1300 Learning Framework: 1^st Year Experience (FYE) course is right on target. I have been able to meet the milestones I set in the timeline I created at the beginning of this project. I believe there are a few reasons for this achievement. First, the intentional act of writing out the tasks and assigning a due date helps me tangibly grasp the work needed and keep the progress not only in my head but in a visual representation. Second, I already have experience developing online courses so I am familiar with the types of tasks needed and the amount of time to allocate. Third, I have steadily dedicated time to work on my course design and have not procrastinated. Lastly, I have been fortunate that my course design project overlaps some duties assigned in my full-time job and I have combined the efforts.

There have been a few technical challenges I have faced and written about in previous blogs. For example: 1) the Canvas rubrics tool doesn’t properly align columns, 2) Canvas does not have a way to add bonus points to the gradebook, 3) the free Canvas LMS does not allow LTI links or SCORM uploads, and 4) the Canvas Announcements tool does not have a way to expire or hide an announcement. I have mentioned previously that I addressed the first three challenges by either putting up with the misalignment and finding alternative means (such as using links and HTML5) to insert my multi-media lessons. I have just encountered the announcements difficulty. I assume that instructors using Canvas need to save their announcements to “the Commons” if they wish to use them again because in order to expire them from a current course, the only way I see to do it is to delete them manually. This is not the case in Desire2Learn. I have always heard glowing praise about Canvas and in many ways it is easy and logical to use. But having now used it and comparing it to Desire2Learn, I find the latter is more flexible and comes with more facilitation features than Canvas.

The challenges I have faced with “people” are actually the same challenges I face as well. We are all working full time jobs, have family obligations, health concerns, and are taking more than one graduate level course. We are busy and stressed. I have tried to be encouraging but worry my reviews on my peers’ work is going to stress them out even more. Also, seeing their struggles with progress makes me worry about them on top of my worry about me. Breathing exercises, taking breaks, and cake seem to help. But overall, my challenges with people have been minimal. I have a good group.

Besides getting to deeply delve into another learning management system, what I take from this school process compared to my professional developments is the reminder to take the time for planning and documentation. Many times at work we get caught up in the fast deadlines and forget how much better a design development goes with written design plans and timelines. I think this is an improvement I can bring to my professional life. My strengths as a designer lie in my organizational skills and attention to details. Taking the time to tie my design to a proven learning theory has been helpful. By keeping a constructivist theory mindset, I was able to decide how best to approach my included activities so that students could progressively build their knowledge. This is an area I’d like to develop further.

When I started my master’s program in the fall of 2017, it had been many years since I had used scholarly-writing to put my discoveries and thoughts on paper. As a graphic and web designer, instructional designer and online teacher, the types of writing I was accustomed to producing were much different. I was used to writing short concise marketing materials and information for web sites. I wrote assignment directions in a technical style. I even wrote in a more personal style for my blog such as this one. I had much to learn about the differences between those styles and what is required for scholarly writing.

It may be obvious, but one of the biggest differences between scholarly-writing and other types is their purpose. Scholarly-writing is meant to be informational and grounded in proven theories and evidence. Ideas and thoughts presented are built upon research performed by others in the past with the goal of expanding knowledge. Other styles of non-scholarly writing can also be informational, but are not necessarily grounded in fact or aim to expand knowledge. For instance, marketing materials use language meant to persuade (hannahhunt09, 2016).

Scholarly-writing has a more formal tone, strives for a more objective point-of-view, and uses a vocabulary specific to the academic discipline it supports. Science-based writing requires the author to reduce as much personal bias as possible and avoid using personal pronouns. Casual language, slang, and contractions are not used. The terms used to describe observations and ideas have precise meaning to get as close to a concept as possible with some only used within the people who study and work within a specific field of study. Alternatively, other styles of non-scholarly writing, such as marketing materials, can be extremely biased and showcase personal opinions in a range of casual to formal language. Also, with widely disseminated materials written for marketing purposes or to provide easy technical instructions, the vocabulary used for non-scholarly writing is chosen by how well it can be understood by the general public. I sometimes see people used to writing in a scholarly-style struggle with composing clear instructions. An example is a when a professor writes a lengthy verbose syllabus for first-year in college freshman. I am sure after writing scholarly articles for their peers comfortable wiith reading academic vocabulary and long explanations it is hard to switch to non-academic writing that requires basic terms and sentence structure.

Scholarly-writing has structural rules to follow such as the American Psychological Association (APA) style, Modern Language Association (MLA) style, and The Chicago Manual of Style. There is a prescribed formula for how a paper is laid out and formatted going into such details as font usage, line spacing, citing sources, and more. Other styles of writing may have conventions to follow, such as preferences on paragraph alignment in an invitation versus a newspaper article, but there is not an all-inclusive published guide with strict rules to follow.

I admit I struggled with reading and writing scholarly articles a year ago when I started my master’s program. But as I read more, received tips from the writing center, became familiar with the Purdue OWL website, and got great feedback from my peers and instructors, I grew more comfortable with the style. I still have a way to go until I am proficient and frankly tend turn to more casual and technical language in my everyday duties. But I am thankful I have access to the wealth of knowledge provided in scholarly writings.

References

Academic vs non-academic articles. (n.d.). Retrieved from Mid Michigan College: https://www.midmich.edu/student-resources/lls/library/find-articles/academic-articles

Badley, G. (2009, April). Academic writing as shaping and re-shaping. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(2), 209-219. doi:10.1080/13562510902757294

Elton, L. (2010, April). Academic writing and tacit knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 151-160. doi:10.1080/13562511003619979

hannahhunt09. (2016, December 2). What are some similarities and differences of academic and non-academic writing? Retrieved from eNotes: https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/similarities-differences-academic-non-academic-258762

How is academic writing different to other kinds of writing? (n.d.). Retrieved from The University of Sydney Learning Centre: http://sydney.edu.au/stuserv/learning_centre/help/styleStructure/st_academicWriting.shtml

Purdue online writing lab: OWL. (n.d.). Retrieved from Purdue University: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/purdue_owl.html

Smissaert, C., & Jalonen, K. (2018). Responsibility in academic writing: A dialogue of the dead. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(9), 704-711. doi:10.1177/1077800417734008

Setting up a task timeline and sticking to it is so beneficial. So far, I am right on target to complete my course design by the due date. I have everything done except the course evaluation quiz. I cannot wait to get a full evaluation from my peer when she reviews my course. By this time, I need a fresh set of eyes to look at it. In fact, I probably need to step back from it for a day or two and then return to look over it again to make sure I have not missed anything important.

A challenge I am facing with the course evaluation is the ability to provide the students an anonymous way to give honest feedback but still give them extra credit for their efforts. It does not seem like there is a confirmation sent to the students that they completed a Canvas quiz. I have thought about adding an “Easter Egg” such as a code or an image in the evaluation quiz that they could then submit in an assignment box to get the extra credit. But I could see where the students may share that information and get credit without earning it. Or perhaps they could take a picture of themselves taking the evaluation quiz and submit that. I am still not quite sure but will decide on a route this week.

I fully expect to be done with the course design this week and start working on my job aid. I am anxious to get started on the next phase because it is something that has been needed by the full-time and especially adjunct professors who teach this course using the provided templates. By creating a job aid for my course design project, I will have a great start on creating one I can use at my place of employment.

So far, I’ve had positive feedback and encouragement from my peers regarding the development of my Learning Framework fully online 16-week course. I only needed to double check consistency between what was mentioned in the directions for the synchronous class meeting and the syllabus.  I have also received feedback from my instructor.  She has confirmed methods I have in place, such as giving online participation grades for discussion activity and synchronous meeting attendance. She also directed me to a Canvas community board post that supported the same method I’m using to provide extra credit scoring in the gradebook. I really appreciated her feedback regarding misalignment of Canvas’ rubric tables when criteria row point values differ for each level. This appears to be a bug in Canvas that is unavoidable. Even though my table columns are not straight, I believe they are still useful, so I will leave them as they are. It is comforting to get feedback from both my peer and instructor when working on this project in my own online course.

I’ve been enjoying the longer timeline and attention I get to pay to the development of this course. I’ve had 8 weeks so far to go through the analysis, design and development stages of the instructional design (ID) process (albeit the time should only be counted as part, since I’m not able to dedicate full work hours to my college courses). I’ve been told that most corporate ID projects typically last three weeks. In my job as an instructional designer for Lone Star College, I can attest that sometimes it is even shorter than that. There are times when at least the first few weeks of a course have to be done in a day or maybe two. Once the course is underway, the instructor and I are struggling to stay at least a week ahead of the students while we build the course as it is being taught. This is not a typical scenario. This is certainly not the best scenario, but it has happened. However, I have developed “canned” content to help in these situations. I have generic first week course materials I can drop into any course and with slight adjustments it is ready to go. This speeds up the design/development process tremendously. I would assume a corporate instructional designer would have the same template structures to help them meet tight deadlines.

However, occasionally I have a project that has the luxury of time. This always produces a more detailed and quality course fully developed before the implementation date. This allows the instructor to concentrate on facilitating the course and ultimately provides a much better learning experience for the students. I’m encouraged that my Learning Framework project is getting this same attention. Ultimately I want it to be an example of what can be designed and developed when proper time is allocated to these stages of the design process.

I’m halfway through the development stage of my fully online Learning Framework: 1^st Year Experience course I’m building in Canvas. As I’m learning about the Canvas LMS, I have run across a few quirks and have had to make some adjustments.

For instance, Desire2Learn (D2L) allows a deeper navigation structure with endless sub-module opportunities. Canvas only allows one level within each module. Instead, I’ve managed to delineate and group areas within a module using Text Headers and indenting. In some regards, I’m not sure this is the most efficient way to arrange the content within the modules. But, if I break it apart into smaller modules (such as individual weeks) I lose the adaptability this design has to be reduced to a 14, 12, or 8-week course by just changing the course schedule, four module titles, and four module directions. I like how in D2L I can group materials in a sub-module and if for some reason the materials all need to be moved to a different area of the course I only have to drag the one sub-module instead of each individual piece.

I found the Canvas Rubrics Tool to be straightforward. But the layout does not line up if the level numbers for each criteria are not the same. There was no apparent way for me to fix the cell widths of the rubric so I had to settle on the bad breaks in the text. It also kept trying to predict and change my criteria scores for each level if I did not use a regular descending pattern of values. I had to be extra careful reviewing each level score to make sure it hadn’t been auto-updated.

I found the SoftChalk LTI Tool App, but it required a code and secret password that I’m not privy to. So instead of having the SoftChalk lesson score feed directly into the gradebook, I embedded the lesson and the instructor will have to read the score in SoftChalk Cloud and then manually enter it in Canvas. I may also need to adjust the size of the images in the SoftChalk lesson because the width of the lesson is constrained to just 800 pixels in Canvas. The SoftChalk lesson itself is responsive but the images I placed in the lesson are set to 400 pixels wide and they are causing the text to wrap around the images in narrow columns.

I may need to reconsider how to supply the course evaluation survey. I want the students to submit their suggestion anonymously, but be able to receive extra credit points. The Canvas quiz tool does allow anonymous surveys. But the quiz/survey does not seem to provide a submission confirmation message or email that the student could then use to submit to an assignment folder for extra credit.

I cannot find a place to assign a due date on non-graded discussions. Therefore, I had to make it a graded discussion with a point value of 0. I also had to assign a point value of 0 to my extra credit items, this way I can add 10 additional points over the set score. This was the solution offered by the Canvas community. D2L has a way to designate a grade item as bonus, but Canvas does not.

Despite the few quirks I’ve encountered, my design model has helped my development smoothly progress. I am able to make the slight adjustments needed without diverging from the main course plan.

I’ve been assigned to build a course using the Canvas learning management system (LMS). It is my fourth system to learn. I started back in 2008 with Blackboard Vista, then Angel, and currently I use Desire2Learn’s Brightspace at Lone Star College. But so far, Canvas has been one of the easiest LMS to begin building an online course. It helps that I have taken some courses as a student in Canvas. It also helps that I took advantage of the Lynda.com training offered to University of North Texas students and watched an excellent tutorial. I also think that after ten years I’ve gotten better at recognizing how LMS work and most of them are similar in principle if not in execution.

However, Canvas has a straightforward interface that uses modern application conventions such as plus sign and dot menu icons. As you add pages, files, assignments and discussions to the modules section it adds the equivalent in the appropriate section and the gradebook (if applicable). The WYSIWYG Rich Content Editor is the same as most other applications. I really liked using the Accessibility Checker when building a table.

It also has some quirks. So far I cannot find how to replace a file I’ve added to Canvas. Instead, I had to delete the file, re-upload the corrected version, and make sure it was added in the right spot within the modules. There is also a disconnection when renaming a page or file. It will only do so in the area you access the editing function. It doesn’t rename it in other places.

Besides an easy LMS, I’ve been pleased with how much having a completed design document helps guide my building activities. It is nice that I’ve already worked out the problem, format, theory, goals, outcomes, activities, course schedule, assessment rubrics, and everything else that goes into the design phase. I’ve learned it is my roadmap and touchstone.

The feedback in the design stage I received from my instructor and peers has been quite helpful in planning the structure of my course in the LMS. I think consistent directions for each part of the course will help guide students through the semester. I hope the feedback I provided my peer was just as helpful. I did not hear one way or another. But looking at how another person approached the design of an online course did spark some ideas for how I would do it myself.

I struggled a bit with converting the face-to-face syllabus for an online environment. The explanation for what constitutes an “absence” in an online course is challenging. I plan on logins and participation in online discussions and meetings replacing what would normally be attendance in a face-to-face course. But the wording in the syllabus is quite off-putting and strict. However, I’m following what the department uses for their other classes and I know that in a community college we suffer from a large number of students who either never show up, drop out, or just quit participating. There are many reasons for this outside of the quality of instruction. I figure the straightforward word choice is there on purpose.

Overall, the development stage of my online course in Canvas is on target and I’m appreciating the process and tools.

Theoretical models of learning are well-defined, research-based, tested and widely accepted by the scientific community (Kop & Hill, 2008). Instructional design models help make the theories tangible and enable putting them into practice by providing frameworks instructional designers can follow (Instructional Design Central, LLC, n.d.).  I think all too often, instructional designers and their clients brush past the theories and jump into the framework of how they will model the instruction. Perhaps the differentiation is assumed? If following a certain model, it means the instruction is using a particular theory. Perhaps the differentiation is ignored in the haste to get the job done? Most of the time my client seems unconcerned.

For this blog posting, I am examining the Cognitive Apprenticeship instructional design model. It falls under the Constructivism Learning Theory especially in regards to relating learning to meaningful world-based experiences. Mimicking four important aspects of traditional apprenticeship (modeling, scaling, fading, and coaching), the cognitive apprenticeship is based on expert teachers sharing their knowledge and skills with novice students incrementally leading and coaching until the novices become experts. Emphasis is also placed on applying learning to real-world situations with the support of a learning community. However, instead of the novices learning to create a trade object, this model is designed so expert teachers vocalize and share processes students follow to learn conceptual knowledge, such as reading, writing or math in an educational environment. The model consists of a framework of four dimensions that define a cognitive apprenticeship learning environment:

Content. This is the knowledge expert teachers bring to the learning environment. Not only do they provide the concepts, facts, and procedures, they also supply the heuristics and strategies for the best solutions. Also, they share how they continue to learn new knowledge.

Method. This is how the learning environment is designed to give students opportunities for observation, participation, discovery and invention. It consists of six teaching methods:

• Modeling – Expert demonstration of what is required.
• Coaching – Teacher observation and inquiry of student progress, supplying hints and reminders, promoting progression and encouraging new challenges.
• Scaffolding – Provided supports that help students perform a task. Fading is the opposite where supports are gradually removed.
• Articulation – Techniques to prompt students to discuss and share their thought processes.
• Reflection – Student comparisons of their solutions to the experts and their own ideal.
• Exploration – Motivation for students to frame and solve their own problems.

Sequencing. The environment includes tasks that structure learning but also provide meaningful direction in a balance of the following three principles:

• Global before local skills – Students are provided an overall concept of the process before delving into specific parts.
• Increasing complexity – Tasks are sequenced in order to control the increase in complexity with scaffolds aiding the early steps of student progression.
• Increasing diversity – Tasks requiring a wider range of strategies and skills are gradually introduced so students learn when and how to distinguish and apply different skills.

Sociology. The learning environment contains a community of experts and other students working on common projects and sharing experiences. It includes situated learning where students apply their knowledge to tasks that mimic future encounters outside of the educational environment. Goals for learning reach beyond just making a grade providing intrinsic motivation and students are investing in helping each other learn (Collins, Holum, & Brown, 1991).

The cognitive apprenticeship model reminds me of elements of other models. It has the balance between content, student social interactions, and teacher presence the Community of Inquiry model displays. It also has methods and processes similar to Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction (Instructional Design Central, LLC, n.d.). Where it differs for me is the connection to traditional apprenticeship and relation of more conceptual subject matter to worldly examples. I can visualize using this model to develop an online course design in several subject areas, especially ones that require students to learn and accomplish complex tasks such as putting together a business plan, programming a software application, or compiling a cosmetology portfolio.

References

Collins, A., Holum, A., & Brown, J. S. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. Retrieved from The 21st Century Learning Initiative: http://www.21learn.org/archive/cognitive-apprenticeship-making-thinking-visible/

Dabbagh, N. (2018, September 22). The Instructional Design Knowledge Base. Retrieved September 22, 2018, from Nada Dabbagh’s Homepage, George Mason University, Instructional Technology Program: http://cehdclass.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/IDKB/index.htm

Garcia-Cabrero, B., Hoover, M. L., Lajoie, S. P., Andrade-Santoyo, N. L., Quevedo-Rodriguez, L. M., & Wong, J. (2018, June). Design of a learning-centered online environment: a cognitive apprenticeship approach. Education Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 813-835. doi:10.1007/s11423-018-9582-1

Instructional Design Central, LLC. (n.d.). Instructional Design Models. Retrieved from Instructional Design Central: https://www.instructionaldesigncentral.com/instructionaldesignmodels

Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103

My peer gave me encouragement and validation that my instructional design for a 16-week fully online First Year Experience course was going great. She said she enjoyed reading it and made personal comments about how she wished she had experienced this type of course when she first started college. I like that she shared her positive feedback in a sincere and honest way. She even pointed out specific areas of my paper that she liked in particular, such as how sharing the focus group data solidified the purpose for the course. This is the type of positive feedback that is helpful for a student, because it goes beyond the simple, “good job” comment and lets a student know what they should continue doing in their future work.

The positive comments also help cushion the more critical comments. My peer was helpful in pointing out areas where the voice of my paper could be more direct and less passive. She also pointed out areas that were unclear to her. I took her advice seriously and was able to look at the problem areas in a new way. I reworded a few of my sentences with active verbs. I also clarified the areas of confusion. I realized I was missing some information because I am too close to my own topic. I added some more detail to make sure the reader understood my intent. There were a few typos she found that I corrected. I think it is always a good practice to have someone else proofread my work. There have been countless times where a mistake was found even though I’d read my own work over and over. I was grateful for my peer’s valuable input.

I’ve recently read three articles that help me think about the beginning stages of instructional design. I am preparing a 16-week fully online course for first year in college students. I want to make sure that my instructional design will meet the students’ learning needs and meet the goals established by our college. The analysis and design stages of the process are important because they help define the needs and map out the best approach to meet these needs. Each of the articles I read has contributed a fresh view for my design.

Problem Based Learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework

This article by John R. Savery and Thomas M. Duffy used clear language to describe and categorize the constructivist learning theory, the eight principles of a constructivist learning environment, and problem-based learning. Constructivism places importance on the learner’s experience relating to the world around them, their prior experiences and their own goals. The eight principles remind me as a designer to keep the student interests in mind when imagining what activities to assign. The tasks should be authentic. The tasks do not need to be dictated. There are ways to allow students to determine their own goals and tasks that will make the learning experience more personally meaningful and still meet the institution’s learning outcome goals. By placing the onus on the learner to determine their path to new knowledge, they not only gain the knowledge but also develop self-regulation, problem-solving and other higher level thinking skills. However the role of the teacher is not diminished, but shifted to that of a coach, facilitator and guide. Learners may need to be carefully led in incremental steps to develop the skills needed to fully function in a constructivist learning environment. The authors suggest that problem based learning (PBL) is a good fit for a constructivist learning environment because it presents the learners with an authentic problem they research, test and develop ways to solve. I would like to explore more about initiating and framing problems for students to solve. As the goals of a first year in college experience course center around helping a student explore their personal methods for succeeding in college, I can use the constructivist theories and methods, including PBL, to design tasks that help students take charge of their own learning and make this a more meaningful experience for them.

A Framework for Interaction and Cognitive Engagement in Connectivist Learning Contexts

Zhijun Wang, Li Chen, and Terry Anderson review literature pertaining to connectivist pedagogy to devise a framework detailing levels of interactions in order to help instructional designs determine what, how and when interactions should be used to promote a more connectivist learning environment. While there are debates about connectivism as a learning theory, this article focuses on how providing connectivist learning expands a student’s interactions not only socially (with other humans and groups) but also with tools, materials and information. I plan on exploring how to use their proposed framework of operational, wayfinding, sensemaking, and innovation interactions to help describe the level of thinking required of activities I include in my instructional design. I think leading a student through operational interactions such as how to maneuver in a learning management system (LMS) can prepare a student to be successful when they move towards a more critical-thinking interaction such as creating a final presentation on their future career dreams shared with their classmates through the same LMS. I found their explanations about each level of interaction to be clear, however I would like to explore actual sample interactions and how they use the framework to justify their contribution to the overall course outcomes. Reading this article allowed me to contemplate what interactions lead me to learn from others and what tools and information I use to facilitate my learning. I want to explore how I can promote students to contemplate the same actions in their own learning experiences.

The need for imagination and creativity in instructional design

Pat Gibson reminds me in her article that the beginning stages of the instructional design process should be filled with imagination and creativity. It is important to open my mind to the “what-ifs” and possibilities of introducing concepts and activities in a new and different way to adult learners. She explains that planning is important but rigidity can be detrimental, especially if the adult learner has more prior knowledge of a subject than expected. I would like to explore her references to Harvey and Harvey’s book written in 2013 about Creative teaching approaches in the lifelong learning sector. Many of her ideas about using imagination and creativity come from their ideas about how to make learning more enjoyable and applicable by using storytelling, metaphors, word play and humor. I want to include some fun in my course design for first year in college students. If their experience is not only helpful but enjoyable it could be a positive force in their journey to earn a college degree.

References

Gibson, P. (2013, July-September). The need for imagination and creativity in instructional design. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 4(3), 34-43.

Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology(35), 31-38.

Wang, Z., Chen, L., & Anderson, T. (2014, April). A framework for interaction and cognitive engagement in connectivist learning contexts. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2), 121-141.