Section 4: Human Performance Technology

Section 4: Human Performance Technology  

Not all problems in learning and/or performance require an instructional one. Many times a non-instructional approach is a more appropriate solution. This week's reading and reflection focuses on human performance, performance support systems, knowledge management systems, and the concept of informal learning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Chapter 14 discusses the concept and evolution of human performance improvement. Several sections of Chapter 14 present a variety of non-instructional solutions to performance problems. Identify a performance problem in your area of work and identify non-instructional solutions that may help solve the problem

 A problem I have seen at the schools I did my student teaching at was the use of the Promethean boards. Let me state however, that I was split between an elementary and pre-k campus and here is the backwards part in my opinion, the pre-k had boards in all of the classrooms whereas the elementary did not. The reason behind this was of course funding which I know the schools have very little control over and the pre-k was also funded by Headstart so they had a bit more funding to buy said boards than the elementary did but to me it still was a waste almost of funding. The elementary teachers have been asking for this technology and the teachers at the pre-k it seemed to take them for granted and did not even use them on a regular basis. The elementary campus did have one board per grade level as of last year and this year that has expanded starting with 5th grade having one for each 5th grade teacher. Hopefully this will be able to continue down the other grades. The way to get the teachers more comfortable with them because I think that was the problem at the pre-k was the teachers were not motivated and could not see all the possibilities in how to use the boards. The knew how to play movies for sure with them and even some used them create flipcharts for the students and even used them to create art. But other than simple projects such as this they needed more training I believe and also support from the administration and maybe even the lead teachers on each team. To me this is were the true support and change can occur, a principal can send everyone to training and everyone will go but they will not get as much as out of it compared to say, if they went to their lead teacher and asked for help or rather that lead teacher came to them informally and taught them several ways to use the board in their lessons.

 

2. Chapter 15 presents performance support systems. Define performance support systems and explain how a performance support system might (or might not) help solve the problem you identified above.

The Three Performance Needs that must be met at each of the Three Levels are:

• Goals - specific standards or expectations that customers have for products or services
• Design - configurations that enables goals to be met efficiently
• Management - practices that ensure goals are up-to-date and are achieved

After seeing this it could be used to help in the problem I have seen in the schools. Each school would need to implement this into their solution.

Goal: to learn the Promethean Board to use it in the classroom
Design: training that the teacher could go to and learn how the board works
Management: the principal or even the IT person on the campus could be in charge of this for the school by checking with teachers and how they are implementing their training in the classroom. The IT person could also have private conversations if the teachers are not comfortable in a whole group setting discussing their problems.

 

3. Chapter 16 explains knowledge management: the way we manage information, share that information, and use it to solve organization problems. Organizations, such as schools, accumulate a great deal information/data, which must be organized in a way that we can make sense of it in order to use for making decisions. What knowledge would help solve the problem you identified above and how would that knowledge need to be collected and managed to help facilitate problem solving?

Seeing as how it is based on the teacher and the lead teacher talking about the problem. Collecting information would be the lead teachers responsibility and getting that information to the teacher. The teacher can collect any information that they have questions on and take that to the lead teacher and discuss it with that teacher. The teacher can also go to their designated IT person and discuss the issues with them. The teacher can also go to their principal and ask for training in this area and go to that training so they can then in turn take it back to the classroom which is the whole point of our own training as teachers.

 

 

 

4. Chapter 17 describes types of informal learning. What informal learning experiences have you participated in at your organization? Could those informal learning experiences be shared with others? Could the knowledge gained in those settings be codified and managed? And should it be managed or should the informal experiences be replicated or broadened to include others?

 
The terms formal and informal learning have nothing to do with the formality of the learning, but rather with the direction of who controls the learning objectives and goals. In a formal learning environment the training or learning department sets the goals and objectives, while informal learning means the learner sets the goals and objective (Cofer, 2000).



Again, I do not have years of experience to pull from for this question, honestly I have had only formal experience in career path so far. Student teaching for experience was formal with a sprinkling of informal. Everything was set out for us to follow, such as teach this lesson, teach these many lessons, teach this grade level, teach these strategies, the list goes on. At the end of each semester of student teaching we had a meeting to discuss what I learned from the experience based on the Five Proficiencies set forth by the TEA with my mentor teacher and college liaison. I could say that any and all talking that I did with my mentor might be considered informal because I would have to initiate the conversation and ask the questions based on what I needed to know. That I would say is were I learned the most other than just observing the teacher in the classroom, those daily conversations about a specific content area, behavior strategy or even how to teach the content is what helped me to expand my knowledge. Based on my experience I think this strategy of pairing mentor teachers with student teachers and even when we are first year teachers is the best way to pass on knowledge from one colleage to the other. This way is exactly what informal means so the pressure that formal training carries is gone and you feel more comfortable asking those questions that maybe you would not in a large group.




http://www.knowledgejump.com/learning/informal.html

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/performance/pi.html

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Section 3: ETEC 561

 

1. Chapter 10 discusses evaluation in instructional design and provides you with two evaluation models, the CIPP and Kirkpatrick models for evaluation. Search for at least two other models used for evaluation and summarize these models. Describe how you would use them to evaluate your instruction.

The first model I would like to discuss would be by Robert Gagne who made a great impact on the educational field and also in the field of instructional technology. His books and models can be not only used for teaching with technology but with any lesson in my opinion. This was my first introduction to him for this assignment so I do not know much about him but from what I have seen it looks reliable and valid. It looks like methods I have seen in my very limited experience in the classroom. Below is a list that breaks down his theory of learning into nine categories.

In addition, the theory outlines nine instructional events and corresponding cognitive processes:

(1) gaining attention (reception)
(2) informing learners of the objective (expectancy)
(3) stimulating recall of prior learning (retrieval)
(4) presenting the stimulus (selective perception)
(5) providing learning guidance (semantic encoding)
(6) eliciting performance (responding)
(7) providing feedback (reinforcement)
(8) assessing performance (retrieval)
(9) enhancing retention and transfer (generalization).

The second method I would to discuss is the criterion-referenced measures (test). I based both of my choices on what I found in the book and then found on the Internet to back up my information. The only experience I have so far again is what my student teaching last year and with the STAAR that we have in the state of Texas and the curriculum that was and is still used in the district that I sub in uses this kind of testing. 


http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/conditions-learning.html


http://www.edtech.vt.edu/edtech/id/assess/purposes.html




2. Reflect on what other questions that instructional design evaluation should address besides whether the instructional design leads to comparable amounts of learning and learner satisfaction as traditional methods. What else would be useful to know?
 
The book in my opinion asks all the right questions I think it just a matter of us as the teacher to use those in our classrooms.  Below are some questions mentioned about formative/summative evaluation that I thought were good. (PG. 147)

Which one is requires more time to complete?
Which one is more expensive?
Which one do learners prefer?
Is this new instruction as good as our old form of instruction?



3. Chapter's 12 & 13 focus on project management and how to manage projects when resources are scarce. You have been assigned to develop a series of professional development sessions focusing on technology use in the classroom for teachers during a time of economic decline. How will you use Situational Leadership to facilitate this project and manage scarce resources?

I would of course use the four phases described in the book about Situational Leadership. I would set up my team and then tell them what were my expectations and when I want them completed. Communication is vital in every situation but especially when you are the one in charge and need to convey a message. The team I put together which may or may not have many people again because of budget, keeping that in mind you can still at the very least put together a slide show of what you can use in the classroom and mention in those slides websites that are FREE, key word there of course that the teachers can use. There is so much that you can do with the technology out there for free, the money goes towards the purchase of that equipment keeping that in mind I would stress this to my teachers that all available funds would be used to get the equipment and then show them what, how, when they could use it in the classroom during those training sessions.

Section Two: Epistemology

1. Epistemology (the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section. Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

For me the difference is simple, meaning epistemology is how we as the individual learn something and instructional methods are how the information is presented to us. The classroom as been up until the later part of the last century as been mainly behavorists and has slowly been changing towards the relativist/constructivist view with swinging back and worth due to the individual school district dynamic.

2. Chapters in this section present two contrasting epistemic stances: positivist and relativist. However, a third stance, the contextualist or hermeneutical, is also widely recognized. This stance falls somewhere between the strictly objectivist/positivist beliefs about knowing and the purely subjectivist/relativist stance. While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. However, relativists ascribe to radical constructivist approaches, while contextualists draw upon social constructivist theories and models. Based on what you’ve read about positivist and relativist epistemologies, as well as behaviorist and constructivist approaches, try to more fully describe a contextualist epistemology. How might it differ from either a relativist or positivist stance, and how might social constructivism differ from either behaviorist or radical constructivist approached to learning and instruction?

'Inasmuch as positivists believe that knowledge exists independent of the individual learner; it follows that they generally employ instructional methods designed to transmit knowledge, so as to help individuals "learn" or duplicate it. Conversely, inasmuch relativists believe that knowledge is not absolute but rather what the individual constructs, they typically rely on instructional methods that are intended to promote...personal interpretations and refine understanding'. (Ch 5,pg. 71) This statement for me defines the two main perspectives quite well and needs no further thought but I am not stopping there of course. I will however keep it short what I do say so as not to ramble. Learning is defined in the book as 'a persisting change in human performance or performance potential'. We has human beings are constantly changing everyday both physically, mentally, and emotionally, we do this each day as individuals and as a soociety/community. Our classrooms facilitate this growth on all levels and we as the
1. Epistemology (the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section. Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?


For me the difference is simple, meaning epistemology is how we as the individual learn something and instructional methods are how the information is presented to us. The classroom as been up until the later part of the last century as been mainly behavorists and has slowly been changing towards the relativist/constructivist view with swinging back and worth due to the individual school district dynamic.

2. Chapters in this section present two contrasting epistemic stances: positivist and relativist. However, a third stance, the contextualist or hermeneutical, is also widely recognized. This stance falls somewhere between the strictly objectivist/positivist beliefs about knowing and the purely subjectivist/relativist stance. While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. However, relativists ascribe to radical constructivist approaches, while contextualists draw upon social constructivist theories and models. Based on what you’ve read about positivist and relativist epistemologies, as well as behaviorist and constructivist approaches, try to more fully describe a contextualist epistemology. How might it differ from either a relativist or positivist stance, and how might social constructivism differ from either behaviorist or radical constructivist approached to learning and instruction?

'Inasmuch as positivists believe that knowledge exists independent of the individual learner; it follows that they generally employ instructional methods designed to transmit knowledge, so as to help individuals "learn" or duplicate it. Conversely, inasmuch relativists believe that knowledge is not absolute but rather what the individual constructs, they typically rely on instructional methods that are intended to promote...personal interpretations and refine understanding'. (Ch 5,pg. 71) This statement for me defines the two main perspectives quite well and needs no further thought but I am not stopping there of course. I will however keep it short what I do say so as not to ramble. Learning is defined in the book as 'a persisting
 teacher have a humongous responsibility to ourselves, our students and our community to try and make sure that each student is given the oppurtunity to thrive and learn everyday how they need to and to be successful at it. The contextualist approach is more of a 'community approach' rather than the individual appoaches of the other two, meaning the community or societal situation will affect the learning in the classroom more so than the individual. So in the classroom you as the teacher would need to keep this in mind when deciding your objective or desired knowledge to be learned.
 

3. Differing epistemic stances lead to differing approaches to learning and instruction, and ultimately to problem-solving. Explain differences in problem-solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?

Behavorists believe in external stimuli to change or influence behavior whereas constructivists believe in internal stimulis to promote change from within. Therefore, how problems are solved in the classroom will depend on how you as the teacher decide to act or react in that situation. If you try it from the behavorist approach it might look like something like this; the teacher explains a behavior/objective to be seen or demonstrated and when it is seen the teacher then gives a reward to the student. When it is done by the constructivist approach the teacher is more of a facilitator not a direct influence such as in the behavorist, they present the problemt to be solved by the students and the students then figure out a way to solve it themselves. The students are self motivators in the second situation whereas the first one they are given the instructions and told what to do and rewarded when their behavior matches the objective. I believe both approaches have their positive and negative effects in the classroom, neither, is right nor wrong both are needed as the classroom is made up of human subjects with varying learning styles.
 

Section One: Instructional/Educational Technology

How do the definitions in the first chapter compare to your own definition of instructional or educational technology? What experiences or other influences have shaped your definition? How has your definition changed from examining the definitions in the first chapter of this book?

I didn't see a significant difference between what I understand and what the book states, it was better worded of course. It gave much detail as well of the history of the field. The evolution of the definition of instructional technology and design was interesting too. My knowledge of the two are still somewhat limited as fas as experience goes due to the fact I am not teaching in a classroom at the moment. I am sure it will once I have my own classroom. As a student teacher last year, it was my first chance to see this in reality. As fas as changing my opinion not so much but definitely more insight as to the field and what it all entails.

2. Next, think of a lesson or unit of instruction that you have developed. Or if you haven’t ever taught or developed instruction, think of one that you have received. How does that lesson adhere or fail to adhere to the six characteristics of instructional design? How would you redesign it to better adhere to the six characteristics.

The only experience I have with lessons is my student teaching last year. When we created lessons for class we had to use Bloom's or the 5E model to ensure rigor and reliability of the material taught. The six characteristics remind me of the Bloom's Taxonomy in several ways. The school district that I did my student teaching in also used a predetermined curriculum so I did not have to create from scratch new lessons. This was a good thing and a negative as well since I did not get much practice creating my own stuff and not every lesson had a technology component. 

3. In the 3^rd chapter, Reiser distinguishes instructional media from instructional design, excluding teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks from the definition of instructional media. Why? Would you consider teachers, chalkboards, and textbooks instructional media? Is the purpose of instructional design to incorporate media into instruction?

They were excluded because it is believed they are the primary source while instructional technology is secondary.

No, I agree with the books definition, somewhat sad but really more of a sign of the times, the chalkboard is being replaced by computers and the textbooks are being put on the web as well or are even being replaced by other materials. They are still a part of the classroom but are being phased out as more and more research is showing that the primary method of instruction is not the only way to deliver the instruction. Students have always learned in different methods, however, our society has not always seen this nor implemented that in the classroom like it is happening in todays classroom. More and more the classrooms of today are switching to the constructivist approach where the teacher is more of the facilitator and not the direct source of learning.