Week 8 Discussion Summary: Practicing Online Facilitation

This week, alongside the work on our Team’s Facilitation Plan we individually practiced online facilitation. Joni and Dave posted challenging situations that we had to respond to. These included posts from students who couldn’t seem to grasp what the process was; who preferred to work alone rather than in a team; who are overwhelmed with the coursework. For good measure, examples of messages from students who do not follow instructions and who post vague responses were also thrown in. I have had my share of facilitation experiences but these scenarios were tough.

Being Asian in a class of mostly American students, I had to assess whether my understanding of the situation was accurate with limited resources. Online interaction poses innate difficulties due to the absence of visual cues which I have come to rely on as a matter of habit. This was magnified with the delay in response owing to the asynchronous nature of the discussion. The way I phrase my responses was also a concern for me. In our part of the world, how you say something counts as much as, if not even more than, what you say. With this recognition, I often wondered whether I was too verbose in compensating for the lack of facial and vocal expressions which would normally complete my message.

Despite the challenges, I thought it was good practice. Based on the responses of classmates, facilitation in any medium requires certain competencies that cannot be compromised: sensitivity to other people, openness to collaboration, and the art of asking the right questions. I found myself thinking of the situations throughout the day, and debating with myself as to the best way of responding. By reading others’ responses, I had a better grasp of what would be acceptable or more appropriate.

Judging from the feedback I got, I think my best contribution was my response to the “overwhelmed student.” It demonstrated giving importance to the student’s point of view, and encouraged her to work with me to improve the situation. Of course, I realize that what works for one person may not work for another. It is the coming together of various elements that determine the appropriate response. And such is the challenge of facilitation: reading the interplay of those elements, even when the online environment renders you partially blind.

Week 7 Discussion Summary: Thoughts on Informal Learning

Although the term “informal learning” is familiar, I have never paused to clearly distinguish it from related concepts. This week clarified this for me using Driscoll’s definitions:
Informal Learning: a learning experience taken based on the initiative of the learner; its goals, sequence, and success all learner-defined. In contrast, Formal Learning’s goals are defined by the instructional designer, the success of which is measured through the objective-oriented assessment tools.

Informal Learning differs from Self-Directed Learning (SDL) in the sense that the former uses materials that are not traditional to, or originally meant for, learning, but nevertheless pursued for this value. Examples include Advertisements, Blogs, Jobaids, conversations. SDL is likewise learner-initiated but uses the more conventional methods and materials (books, online learning and the like).

This week’s discussion primarily revolved around the idea that informal learning is engaged in by everyone. Everyone in class shared their interests outside of work and class, and there is agreement that when something is interesting or relevant to an individual, different methods are used to quench this thirst for knowledge.

But how do we gain this knowledge anyway?

A major source is other people. Socialization is instrumental in knowledge and skill-building. Think of the uniqueness in people that is cross-pollinated through all sorts of conversations and observations! In some instances, the opportunity of “passing through” another person’s life can have profound impact on one’s development- intentionally or not.

Another way is by accessing content we feel will complete the gaps in, or challenge, our mental models. And since learners needs and experiences vary, their use of available content will not be as structured as in formal learning environments. They will take, chew, stop and continue as they see fit.

As such, the instructional designer must find ways to familiarize herself with possible audience and make available learning experiences that will intersect with the learners’ interests.

It is along this line that I thought I made my most valuable contribution:
Would there be different emphasis in Instructional design competencies when designing for Formal versus Informal Learning? Will “packaging” content, and creating redundancies to allow for learner entry and exit at various points be more important in Informal Learning environments, for instance? In contrast, would sequencing content and developing assessment tests to measure success be more valued in the realm of Formal Learning?

I found this contribution significant because it impacts on my role as an Instructional designer and the development path I need to take. I have never consciously designed for informal learning and anticipate changes in what I currently do…I don’t have the answers to my question yet, but I hope to have a bit more clarity in due time.

Week 6 Discussion Summary: "Significant Ideas"

This week, our discussion groups were smaller in view of “The Final Post” strategy. After going through chapters on Design Decisions, Absorb, and Do Activities, each of the five (5) cohort members identified an “aha” idea that the rest of the cohort would react to. A final post will be written by the idea generator to summarize the intervening comments.

The strategy involved more intimate dialogue due to fewer members, making it easier to reply and encapsulate the ideas in the final post. A major challenge was adhering to the number of words; it seemed inadequate to articulate the ideas that I wanted to put forth.

The ideas in our cohort revolved around:

Storytelling
Storytelling is a universal teaching strategy that could be used as an absorb, do, or connect activity. Aside from this flexibility as a teaching tool, it also bridges cultures. While it is an effective method that captures attention in other countries, in the Southeast Asian culture, storytelling is prized for its ability to deliver messages otherwise thought to be “confrontational.” In a space where saving face is vital, stories thrive where no direct messages dare to tread.

Podcasting
Podcasting is said to be the re-packaged, technology-infused version of lectures. An “absorb” type of modality, it enables users to learn anytime, anywhere, limited only by telecommunications network. This method also appeals to learners from the younger generation whose activities revolve around similar technologies.

In contrast to the methodologies above, the last two ideas delve on design:

Strategic Design Decisions
When resources are limited, learners’ needs vary and environmental factors influence the outcomes, instructional designers must continually assess trade-offs between what is desired versus what is practical. Horton wrote that it is better to make these decisions in the beginning (no matter how painful for the designer), to improve chances that the learning experience will be effective later on.

The End in Mind
In order to design effective instruction, we should start with the result we want to achieve and work backwards. Like an architect, constructing a house without a blueprint depicting the desired outcome result in costly mistakes or below standard conditions. The design should break down the sequence that will lead to the desired outcome.


I thought my best contribution was:
“eLearning design is only as good as what we make it. While it affords us possibilities through its tools and attributes, the decisions we make regarding how to meet a wide array of needs will determine the real value of eLearning.”

It summarizes the opportunities and limitations that eLearning and its technology brings, which gives more importance to the human component that decides on its optimal use.

My favorite quote resonates with decisions instructional designers make:
“Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives.” --Willa A. Foster

Week 5 Discussion Summary: "Social and Self-Paced Instruction

One of eLearning’s touted advantages is the learner’s ability to study at her pace and convenience. Should the social aspect be sacrificed for the sake of this benefit?

Our discussion this week focused on the importance of addressing the social values in self-paced instruction, and the options for doing so:

Designing Social Experiences after Individual Learning
Experiences were shared about how individual learning enabled basic knowledge acquisition, and how social interactions were used thereafter to enhance and deepen this. These would include “sandboxes”, discussion groups, communities of practice (CoPs), live or virtual Q & A sessions. These interactions allowed the learners to calibrate their understanding and strengthen knowledge absorption as they tested their concepts alongside others’.

Despite its benefits, some social activities present challenges to instructional designers. In particular, user groups/CoPs and Q&A sessions: the fading participation in the former, and lack of participation in the latter. Defining the causes of these (whether design, process, or motivation problems) will empower the instructional designer in developing a holistic self-paced cum social learning experience.


Embedding Social Experiences in Individual Learning
With advances in technology, social interactions can be simulated using characters the learner can “converse” with. Depending on the desired effect, these characters can provide directions, instructions, reactions. Although limited in capabilities compared to human interaction, this allows self-paced learning and integrates elements of social instructional value.


I think my best contribution in the discussion was about the common failure of purely online learning due to motivational (and cultural elements):
“My suggestion is to use learning from computers for declarative knowledge areas (Knowledge and Comprehension in Bloom). This would keep the duration of such “isolated” learning events manageable. I would recommend blending this with classroom or online discussion groups, or team activities/projects (virtual or f2f). All these activities provide opportunities to interact with others. Another option that will be valued highly is the ability to communicate with the instructor.”
It earned Karma Points from Kay Tucker, a cohort member for stating a workable guideline in determining self-paced and social blend. I also think that my contribution reflects the reality that I observe in my work regularly, and something I should consider in improving the products and services I offer my clients.

Week 4 Discussion Summary: Philosophies, Theories and Me

This is a milestone for me. I am joining the blogging generation for the first time. My kids will be so proud…

This week, we all had to take the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) to get a picture of our beliefs in this area. While some of the questions were a breeze to answer, a few required deeper thought. I had to think of actual experiences to situate myself in and come up with the most honest answer I could give. In my final result, I scored highest in Behavorist and Progressive. I scored lowest in Humanistic, citing the reason as “probably due to my belief that you can learn the CONCEPT of affective/emotional elements through training but would require more than instruction to learn it (in this case, apply it). “

I am not a big fan of learning philosophies and theories, although I would concur to their great value in our profession. What I found interesting in the discussion were some of the perspectives we had based on what we do. Classmates teaching in schools articulated their Liberal and Humanistic philosophies, while those in the corporate learning field discussed our tendency towards Behavorism and Progressivism.

The fundamental reason for our existence influences how we think. In the academic field, teachers prepare the students to be the best they can be; the goals are more general. In the training field, where resources are scarce and results are more specific, the instruction is more specific to meet organizational goals (Results!). Therefore there is wider latitude in education (just in case instruction will be needed) than in corporate learning (where instruction is just-in-time to deliver desired performance).

The above thought was what I perceived to be my best contribution because it helped clarify the distinction between training and education.

My biggest takeaway from the discussion was that our beliefs are quite set. Demanded by our profession is the flexibility to adjust to our learners’ requirements, and we do that by using the theories to operationalize the instructional values.